Friday, 31 July 2015

Dura Lex Sed Lex

Sometimes when confronted with a mountain that we have to climb it is
not important how we got to be there, by its base, looking up but what
is important is both having to climb it and the reason why.

It’s only important to just focus on the task ahead and not lose a moment dwelling on what happened before.

This is such a situation.

We
will not explain why we’re breaking from the break again, which we in
reality did a few days ago on Facebook, nor about the short but eventful
trip it has been from then to now.

As a background to what we want to say today will be the following:

(a)
Concerning the contest to Mr Amaral’s appeal made by the McCanns
on July 13, Mr Tony Bennett, among other considerations, also had this
to say: “this case has now been running in the incompetent and corrupt
Portuguese judicial system for 6 years and 1 month”;

(b) There was a reaction to Mr Bennett having called the Portuguese judicial system incompetent and corrupt;

(c)
Mr Bennett counter-reacted by first showing through some studies how
corrupt a country Portugal was and then making an 18-point list about
how the Portuguese justice system had been unfair to Mr Amaral.

2. Needless insult

This
list made up by Mr Bennett showed, in our opinion, that he had some
misconceptions about the Portuguese judicial system that apparently made
him draw wrong conclusions about it that in our opinion he shouldn’t have and
because of these make unfounded criticism of it.

These
misunderstandings needed, in our opinion, to be corrected as if Mr
Bennett had reached such conclusions then so could others do the exact same.

About
Portugal being corrupt Mr Bennett quoted various studies and media
articles but all was about a perceived corruption and not a factual one.

Not saying there isn’t corruption in Portugal and we will soon show that there is evidence that there is.

Nor
are we saying the studies quoted by Mr Bennett are untrue but if one
takes a citizen from any country (including the UK) and one asks him if
he thinks his country is corrupt or not he will most probably answer
that it is one of the most corrupt in the world.

The citizen is
not being dishonest. On the contrary. He’s being absolutely honest and
responding with the knowledge he has and that is the reality of his
life.

His opinion is based on his experience and with the
ignorance of what the reality of other countries truly is. He doesn’t
know how to compare his country to others and will evidently exaggerate
the problems that affect him directly.

However, and that is what
mattered, under scrutiny was the Portuguese judicial system being
corrupt and incompetent and not the country itself.

The closest
Mr Bennett came to addressing that issue was in these words he quotes,
“scandals of corruption, recurring obstacles in pending investigations,
crimes that go unpunished and new anti‐corruption policies that have no
effect on these issues”.

However this happens to be said about Portugal but it could be said about UK or almost any other country in the world.

Portugal’s judicial system record against corruption seems to be impressive:

The
“Casa Pia” process, sentenced a diplomat Jorge Ritto, the most popular TV
presenter Carlos Cruz – active and alive – known at the time as “The TV
Man”, and two other prominent members of society - Manuel Abrantes
(deputy responsible for Casa Pia) and Ferreira Diniz a doctor known as
the “Ferrari doctor”. In this process, a former minister Paulo Pedroso
was under preventative prison and was released without charges. Pedroso
was a member of parliament when he was arrested.

The process concerning the way submarines were purchased for the Portuguese Navy, in which the current Deputy Prime Minister and
then Minister of Defense Paulo Portas was involved. It was archived, no
charges.

The “Freeport” process, which involved former Prime Minister José Sócrates when he was a minister in a previous government. No charges.

The
“Face Oculta” process, in which a former minister Armando Vara and José
Penedos, ex-president of the public electrical company REN, sentenced
both to 5 years in prison.

The “Homeland” process, which sentenced
Duarte Lima to 10 years in prison for fraud. Lima was a prominent PSD
politician having been this party’s parliament leader.

The
“BPN” process, involving former ministers Oliveira e Costa, then banker,
and Dias Loureiro. They were charged but acquitted in court. Oliveira e
Costa was under preventative prison.

The Isaltino Morais
process, he was the most popular head of a township in the country (he
was the President of Oeiras township at the time) and was sentenced to 2
years in prison for money laundering and fiscal fraud.

The
ongoing “Monte Branco” process, in which Ricardo Salgado is currently an
arguido. Salgado, banker and head of BES, the biggest private bank when it was dissolved August last year. Salgado was then considered the most
powerful man in Portugal. Then he had the epithet of “Dono
Disto Tudo” or literally translated “The Owner of All This”;

The
ongoing “Operação Marquês”, in which ex-Prime Minister José Sócrates is
under preventative prison, the former minister Armando Vara under house
arrest with electronic monitoring among other very wealthy men who are
also arguidos in this process;

Finally, the ongoing “Caso BES” process, in
which the once very powerful banker Ricardo Salgado was very recently
made an arguido and was subject to the coercive measure of house arrest.

The
list above clearly shows that the Portuguese judicial system is
fighting corruption at the highest levels of political and economic
powers.

Safeguarding the presumption of innocence of all the
above listed who are awaiting the outcome of their processes, what has been listed
shows that there is corruption but also there is a judicial system set
in fighting it where it matters in a way we do not see in other
countries.

The politicians and bankers of a country may be
corrupt but that doesn’t mean that the judicial system of the country
also is. To make such an extrapolation is absurd.

But then Mr
Bennett adds unfairness to his accusations against the Portuguese
judicial system. One must note that although the initial question was
about accusing a system of being corrupt and incompetent, Mr Bennett
deflects the issue to unfairness. To be corrupt is always to be unfair to someone one way or the other but most often to be unfair doesn't mean one is corrupt.

And as we will see later, a system can be unfair and that doesn’t mean it is in any way corrupt or incompetent.

Mr Bennett
uses the example of one citizen, Gonçalo Amaral, to show how corrupt,
how incompetent and how unfair the Portuguese judicial system is
according to him.

Can a single person, as in the case of Mr Amaral, represent an entire system? We don't believe so even if Mr Bennett was right on all 18 points of
his list, which he’s not.

Mr Amaral has been involved within the Portuguese judicial system in the following processes, that we are aware of:

#1 – Death of Joana Cipriano, investigation and trial. Closed.

#2 – Disappearance of Maddie McCann investigation. Archived and re-opened. Mr Amaral no longer has any relationship with it.

#3 – Torture of Leonor Cipriano, trial. Closed.

#4 – Libel against Marcos Aragão Correia, trial. Closed.

#5 – Damages suffered by the McCanns, trial. Ongoing.

To Mr Bennett, #2 to #5 clearly represent that the Portuguese judicial system has been unfair to Mr Amaral.

But as we will see, not even in #2 is he right and in all the other 3 counts he’s completely wrong.

About #5 we remind that the decision taken by the 1st Instance Court at the end of April this year has no effect as the process is still continuing.

Mr
Bennett says the fact that the Book trial has taken 6 years and 1 month
and one simply cannot foresee when it will end he claims “I rest my
case” about the incompetence of the Portuguese judicial system.

As
a man of the law Mr Bennett should know and apparently doesn’t, that
each country has its own legal system and to establish parallels between
any 2 is absurd.

For example, in the UK in a libel process the
offending party has to prove it has not offended while in Portugal the
burden of proof lies with the offended one. In criminal law, Portugal is
inquisitorial while in the UK it’s an adversarial system. UK has juries
in higher courts, Portugal doesn’t. UK has a life sentence, Portugal
the maximum sentence is 25 years.

Besides, each country has its own legal schedules and timelines.

To accuse someone of incompetence because it follows schedules and timelines determined by law is wrong and is insulting.

One may be baffled by them but as they are what they are by legitimate law one simply has to accept them.

Unless
Mr Bennett has evidence that a schedule was not adhered to by any of
those involved he should simply be silent about linking the time the
process has been going in a judicial system to that system being
incompetent.

If that is all which Mr Bennett rests his
incompetence case on then we think best he rethinks before making such hasty
assertive judgements. Hasty judgements seldom are right.

It has taken 6 years, it could be more, it
could be less and it simply is what it is and most importantly it is
what is written in law.

In our post “Nobel Stupidity Prize of the Millenium”
in January 2010, we warned very clearly of this. To consider it a problem, which
we do, is to give an opinion which is to be respected but to consider
it incompetence is just wrong.

A system that safeguards personal
guarantees to the extreme is permeable to legal games. However the
Portuguese judicial system was set up legitimately that way by those
rightfully elected to do it.

Just to give an example, José
Sócrates hasn’t been charged yet but by now over THIRTY judges have
taken a legal decision about him, on various appeals and habeas corpus
since he was arrested in November last year. His legal team has used all
possible legal tools available to them by the system. This is taking
the legal games to its allowed extreme, being allowed is the keyword. To
be very clear, allowed legally.

These unquestionably legal manoeuvres deplete resources, both human and of time.

It’s
true the process involving Mr Amaral’s book has been ongoing for 6
years but it has to be said it has been delayed in legal games by both
sides of the fence.

One may not agree with the system as it
exists and is designed. One may criticise it fiercely and harshly, one
may say it’s inefficient. That is only an opinion to be respected but
doesn’t constitute grounds to accuse it of incompetence.

One is
allowed an opinion but what one may not do is to insult it just because
where one lives things are done differently and/or better according to
one’s opinion.

Using Mr Bennett as an example. He saw himself in a
legal situation in which he felt had to sign an agreement. He breached
that agreement and was sentenced because of that. Was the system
corrupt? No. Was it unfair? Probably but it’s the law.

One must not confuse an unfavourable decision with corrupt or incompetent ones.

One
must however note that the corrupt and incompetent system, the one Mr
Bennett seems to say is after Mr Amaral like a vicious dog, is the same
one which Mr Bennett recognises has decided wholly in favour of Mr
Amaral.

And it’s the same corrupt and incompetent system Mr Amaral says he trusts.

We
would also like to point out that if Mr Bennett’s intent was to help Mr
Amaral, by calling the Portuguese judicial system corrupt and
incompetent he’s doing exactly the opposite.

If the system is
indeed corrupt and incompetent as stated by Mr Bennett (which we will say
again it is NOT) would it be wise to call it corrupt and incompetent
now just BEFORE it is taking a major decision that directly affects the
life of a person we all care about?

In what way would that help
Mr Amaral if indeed Mr Bennett was right? Wouldn’t that make a corrupt
and incompetent system even more resolute in deciding against Mr Amaral?

As we said, fortunately Mr Bennett is not right as we will proceed to show
by going over the points Mr Bennett has listed, so little harm is done.

3. Mr Bennett’s 18 points list

“1.
Frustrating Amaral’s investigation. The Portuguese judicial system
hampered Amaral’s investigation by restricting his ability to look at
the historic ’phone records of the McCanns and their ‘Tapas 7’ friends.”

The
law is clear and it states that telephone tapping of any private
communication interception can only be made with a court order and it
applies only AFTER that decision is taken.

Retroactive intrusion
by the state in private communications is illegal. The judge allowed a
record of telephone traffic i.e. numbers called and numbers dialled but
not any its contents which is what the law states.

Mr Bennett’s expectations are that the judge should have gone against the law of the Portuguese Republic.

This was decided by the judge in Portimão and further validated by the Évora Appeal Court.

Not seeing any form of corruption and incompetence here.

“2.
The long-running libel trial. After 6 years and 1 month, the Portuguese
judicial system still cannot decide (a) whether Amaral libeled the
McCanns and/or (b) whether his book ‘The Truth about A Lie’ should be
banned.”

It is not a libel trial.

Portugal
has many legal Codes, in which two deal with what we could call
“infringement of the general law”: the Civil Code and the Penal Code.

Whatever
is stated in the first, the Civil Code, are non-criminal offences, what is in the second, the Penal Code, is
criminal. Libel or defamation is part of the second, so clearly a crime.

Libel (or defamation) in Portuguese Law is a criminal offence as contemplated in article 180 of the Penal Code.

In Common Law, “Libel” implies a defamatory comment, either written or spoken and, as per above, in Portugal defamation is under the jurisdiction of a criminal court and subject to the Penal Code dispositions.

The court proceedings to judge libel HAS to be a criminal court, in Portuguese a “Vara Criminal”.

What we have currently in the McCann v Amaral trial would be best translated as a Civil Law suit for damages.

To
be precise, in Portuguese it is an “Acção de Processo Comum Ordinário,
objecto: Factos Ilicitos (Vara Cível)”, which literally translated is
“Normal Common Procedural Action, Object: Illicit Facts (Civil Court)”-

Note that it’s about illicit facts and not criminal ones.

The
object of this case is to prove the relationship between proved illicit
facts committed by the one who has breached a right of the
others and the PERCEIVED harm caused to those who had their right
breached and then establish the damages to be awarded.

The
McCanns decided not bring a private criminal action via a lawyer with
regards to the crimes of defamation but instead to bring a Civil Law
Suit for Damages.

The verdict was achieved with basis on articles 484 and 483 of the Civil Code and also on numbers 1 and 2 of article 335 of the same code, within the scope of a right to a good name and a conflict of rights (i.e. between the right to a good name v freedom of speech).

About the time the process is taking we have already addressed and will address again.

Fail to see corruption and/or incompetence.

“3. He was denied ‘Legal Aid’ for the trial.”

Mr
Amaral does not fulfil the criteria for legal aid. In a country where
the minimum monthly wage is now 500 €uros it would be insulting to those
in need, to those for whom legal aid was conceived to give such legal
aid to Mr Amaral.

The criteria is determined by law and the law was simply followed. No unfairness.

No corruption or incompetence.

“4.
It is probably the longest-running libel trial in the history of the
earth; even now the appeal probably won’t be heard until October, and
almost certainly, it will run for some good time after that.”

Again
not libel. It is fascinating how persistent Mr Bennett uses the term
even after Mr Amaral coming out publicly to clarify that it is not
libel.

The civil law suit for damages was filed by plaintiffs who
live outside Portugal (who have complained how bothersome it is to go
to Portugal) and who have convened witnesses who also live outside the
country.

This fact alone implies a complex logistic operation on notification and confirmation of presence.

It also requires translation services that are time consuming.

The
appeal will probably take time, and rightfully so, as it means it is
being properly studied and analysed in legal terms by a collective of
Judges.

Like it or not, there are far more urgent cases than this in Portugal that need to be decided.

The
world does not revolve around Kate and Gerry McCann or this case.
Although it does make the news that is mostly due to media marketing
than of priority given in legal terms. In fact when there was the
computer glitch last year, the process was given a low priority.

In terms of visibility the case has much more relevance in the UK then it does in Portugal.

There
is a limited number of judges responsible for both criminal and civil
cases in first instance courts as well as the number of courts which has
been reduced due to the economic crisis. Time consuming, yes, but with
good reason.

The process is taking the time any other process in similar circumstances takes.

No corruption or incompetence of the Portuguese judicial system.

“5.
That is fair neither to Amaral nor to the McCanns. Only the lawyers
benefit, in terms of vastly increased fees. ‘Justice delayed is justice
denied’ is a popular saying here. So too for Amaral. The continuing
uncertainty and anxiety. The rising costs. The inability to ‘move on’.
And on.”

Judicial costs in Portugal are a mere fraction of those in many other countries.

Mr Bennett shouldn’t judge, as we think he is doing, the costs based on his experience in the UK.

In the ideal world
each country would have an abundance of judges and courts, such is not
the case in Portugal or anywhere in the world.

As mentioned above
the trial has been delayed by both sides of the fence on several
occasions, requires translation and availability from witnesses and
plaintiffs to go to Portugal.

Is it fair? No, it is not but it
can’t be done faster and one either follows what the law states or then
uses google translate in court and a Star Trek “beam me up Scottie”
system for all those convened.

And because it can’t be done faster it cannot be considered unfair. It is, again, just the way it is.

The
uncertainty, anxiety, costs and inability to move on are the
consequences of the way the system is designed and not because of
corruption and incompetence as stated by Mr Bennett.

Mr Amaral is not being treated any different than any other person would be.

“6.
The ex parte proceedings that Amaral never knew about. Three months
after the McCanns issued their writ for libel damages, the Portuguese
judicial system allowed the McCanns an ‘ex parte’ hearing (that is, the
other party (Amaral) is not even told about it). Amaral wrote about it
in Chapter 6 of ‘The English Gag’ (see ‘TERRIBLE NEWS’ thread, here:
http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t8856-terrible-news... ). He was in a
restaurant when the owner ran out to him and said ‘I’ve just heard about
it on the radio – your book’s been banned!’ This was a wholesale denial
of natural justice and fairness to Amaral.”

Mr Bennett
should please not confuse trials. This was a “Providência Cautelar” or
an Injunction as it has been called, nothing to do with libel again.

We should clarify the term injunction that is being used when describing what happened in 2009/2010.

The procedural term in Portuguese is Providência Cautelar. Would translate it into Cautionary Action.

A
Cautionary Action is requested by individuals and the other individual
notified afterwards in several cases. It is a temporary measure until a
full audience decides the case.

Unfortunately as reality shows
that processes do go on for a significant period in time, it is a legal
procedure used very often.

The system basically recognises it’s
slow and provides the parties the possibility to request an
“anticipation of the decision” to ensure that the effects desired are
those that are achieved when the decision is finally taken.

To exemplify, 2 examples from Mr Amaral:

-
banning of book, in case it is decided it is to be banned, then to do
it only when final decision made then meanwhile the book would have been
sold and read and the effect of banning would be nil in terms of
dissemination of the information it contain;

- seizure of assets,
same logic, if one was to wait until the end then the defendant upon
realising he would lose the case would have time to change the property
of his personal assets.

The procedure for the application of a
Cautionary Action is a simplified one and is of an urgent nature, so
much so that in many cases it does not require the presence of the
person(s) to whom the injunction is against, should the judge decide
that would risk the object or efficiency of the Cautionary Action.

Mr Amaral was not singled out by Cautionary Actions. As said, it’s a procedure commonly used.

The
book trial began with a Cautionary Action to ban the book because it
infringed McCann’s right to a good name because it COULD be defaming
them.

The 1st Instance Court decided to implement the requested
Cautionary Action and so the book was banned, the Appeal Court decided
against that decision and allowed the book to be put on the stands
again.

The McCanns appealed to the Supreme Court. After the
appreciation of the Appeal Court’s decision the higher court decided
that the Appeal Court’s decision was correct and that there were no
grounds for appealing its decision, so refused the appeal.

The
fact that Mr Amaral first heard of the decision from the media is
because as experience has shown it seems that the connection to the
media seems to work really fast when it comes to decisions that don’t
favour Mr Amaral.

It has nothing to do with corruption or
incompetence but with the way “sound waves” travel. He was treated
unfairly by the media not by the Portuguese judicial system.

“7.
Not only was this secret hearing grossly unfair (it would be unlawful in
such proceedings in the U.K.), but it also took several truly draconian
steps:”a. immediate banning of his bookb. impounding all books printed but not soldc. ordering delivery of the books by Amaral and his publisher to the lawyer acting for the McCannsd. sequestering many of his property and other assetse. denying him about one-third of his income”

Please
see reply to #6. The Appeal Court decision on this Cautionary Action
overturned, when it was legally competent to do so, the 1st Instance
Court decision listed from a. to c.

Some of the items listed above (d. and e.) are part of the current civil law suit for damages and not of the Cautionary Action.

The draconian steps are but what is stated in the law and Mr Amaral was not singled out.

No corruption and no incompetence.

There
are no such thing as “secret hearings” in Portugal. Not only would they
have no legal value as they are absolutely illegal.

To make such
a statement is to show ignorance about how the Portuguese judicial
system works and about its limitations set by the Portuguese
Constitution.

“8. The failure of the Lisbon Civil Court to follow
the rulings of the Portuguese Appeal and Supreme Courts. Both courts
were clear that Article 10 of the European Human Rights Convention:
‘Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Expression’ favoured Amaral’s right to
publish. For whatever reason - corrupt or otherwise – the judge in the
recent trial found a way to ignore these two rulings.”

The constant decisions of the Appeal Court and Supreme Court are jurisprudence and a source of law or law.

However,
since we are talking about a case of a conflict of rights the judge
decided totally within the law, although we personally don't agree with
her decision.

That does not make it illegal, much less corrupt or
incompetent. She applied the law as per her legal duties and boundaries
and did not in any way circumvent this.

There are cases where
what is being analysed that not everything is predicted in the written
law and the judge has a margin for interpretation.

The fact is that here is a case of two conflicting rights. Freedom of expression and the right to a good name.

It’s
on this point that the judge deemed necessary, which she was
legitimately entitled to do, to source other jurisprudence to decide
which right should prevail, in her legitimate opinion.

If law was simply black or white there would be no need for courts, judges or lawyers. It isn’t.

Disagree as we do, the judge acted within the law.

Especially since the matter being analysed, damages inflicted to individuals, is a very subjective one.

Moreover,
one must not forget that on all other points the judge ruled in favour
of Mr Amaral, so it cannot be considered unfair.

The damages
awarded are in my opinion excessive and the decision is subject to
disagreement but we STRESS, a legal one. We have already had the
opportunity to consider it completely disproportionate but it’s neither
corrupt nor incompetent.

It cannot be considered unfair as it
isn’t considered effective by the Portuguese judicial system as this is
now a matter for the appeals court to decide with its collective of
Judges.

“9. The removal of Amaral as Investigation Co-ordinator.
The Policia Judiciara (PJ) is part of the Portuguese judicial system,
run by the Ministry of Justice. It was senior officials in the PJ,
certainly influenced by the British Prime Minister at the time, Gordon
Brown, who ordered Amaral to be removed from his post.”

Here Mr
Bennett is right. we totally agree, although we do not know who the
participants were, it was a clear manoeuvre to avoid a diplomatic clash.

However
it must be said that when Mr Amaral gave his interview while heading
the investigation he was aware that he would suffer some sort of
consequence.

“10. The inadequate Attorney-General’s Report. In
July 2008, the Attorney-General’s final report was published. It
recommended that the investigation into Madeleine’s disappearance merely
be archived. It showed every indication of being a politically
watered-down report, bearing little relation to the robust,
well-evidenced and well-argued interim report of Tavares de Almeida,
dated 10 September 2007.”

Firstly, it was not the Attorney General, it was the District/Local Prosecutor. And it’s not a report but a dispatch.

Everyone knows our opinion about this but here and now we must play the devil’s advocate.

The
prosecutor considers that as it stands, there is not enough evidence to
bring the case to a court of law and we must agree with him as we’ll
explain.

There are leads in the report that were left as
uncertainties and which, in our opinion, could have easily have become
certainties. Namely the forensics. But fact is they were left as
uncertainties when they arrived at the hands of the prosecutor for a
decision.

The whole Maddie process is too peculiar and too
specific that it has to be studied on its own. It doesn’t reflect either
of the judicial systems involved as they have been victims of outside
interference at political level. It’s not corruption or incompetence but
something much more serious than that.

What happened cannot be extrapolated to the rest of the Portuguese judicial system as Mr Bennett does.

The report as it stood, or how it was made to stand did not present enough evidence to charge, that’s a fact.

Portuguese courts do not allow cases to be brought based on circumstantial evidence alone. And rightly so. “In dubio pro reo”.

What precisely did Mr Bennett expect the prosecutor to do when there is not even any knowledge of what crime it really was?

Was
it manslaughter or was it homicide? Was it with or without intention?
Was it planned or not? Was it only the couple, were theT9 collectively
responsible or was a third party responsible? Was there an abduction or
did the child wander off and have an accident?

What was the cause of death? Even though there is no need of a body to make a charge, where is it? What happened to it?

Tavares
de Almeida says that all evidence points towards the parents but
doesn’t take that decisive step which would be to ask for them to be
charged.

And the investigation continues after the Tavares de
Almeida report meaning there were things that still needed further
clarification.

If these things weren’t clarified by July 2008 as
they weren’t, then the correct interpretation for the dispatcher to make
is that what was uncertain in September 2007 remained so in July 2008.

If
there wasn’t enough evidence to charge in September 2007 then the same
amount of evidence continued not to be enough to do so in July 2008.

The
prosecutor is not being corrupt or incompetent when he deemed it
necessary that evidence for this kind of crime needs forensic
corroboration, a decisive witness, a confession and a reasonable
explanation as to what happened to the body. At the moment we have none,
sadly.

The decision is not dodgy. What was dodgy was the way the
process was prepared for such a decision and that was the doing of both
the Portuguese and British judicial systems.

To say that it was
just the Portuguese one is wrong. But again must stress that the Maddie
investigation doesn’t serve as an example for anything.

However,
one thing must be said clearly, the prosecutor failed when not charging
them with abandonment and exposure, something we don’t believe happened
but it’s a fact that they claimed publicly to have done on more than one
occasion and hasn’t been contradicted, legally, by anyone.

On
this aspect we must subscribe that the decision (or non-decision) on the
part of the Portuguese judicial system was highly irregular to say the
least.

“11. Allowing the lying murderess-of-her-own-child to
bring a criminal prosecution against Amaral. Leonor Cipriano murdered
her daughter in 2005, pretending that she had been abducted. She lied
about this and was shown to be a serial liar on many other occasions.
Yet the Portuguese judicial system allowed her to bring a state-funded
criminal prosecution against Amaral and 4 other detectives, alleging she
had been tortured.”

Even a murderess has a right to bring a judicial action against another.

The
decision of the court was that there was no torture and Leonor Cipriano
had more time added to her sentencing due to perjury in court. Justice
was done.

No corruption, no incompetence and no unfairness.

“12. The prosecution failed to prove that any of the 5 detectives she had named had tortured her.”

The Court decided that there was no torture. Justice was done.

If the system was corrupt and had its cross-hairs set on Mr Amaral, wouldn’t this be easily “proved”?

“13.
During the proceedings, the lawyer representing Leonor Cipriano, Marcos
Aragao Correia - who was paid by the McCann Team - was barred from
continuing to represent her any more because of his conduct in court and
due to his having been found guilty of professional misconduct by the
Lawyer’s Association in his native Madeira. The judicial system
miraculously ordered the judge to reinstate him two days later.”

The
lawyer represented Leonor Cipriano till the end. Marcos Aragão Correia
was suspended by the order of lawyers but this did not reflect on his
representation of Leonor Cipriano.

Mr Correia was suspended in January 2009 preventatively and provisionally by the Lawyer’s Order.

This had nothing to do with the judge, it was a decision applied by and lifted by the Lawyer’s Order.

This
Order represents the profession of Portuguese lawyers but is not part
of the Portuguese judicial system. His suspension was a professional
problem, not a legal one.

While he was provisionally suspended
the judge denied his presence in the trial as she should have. Once the
Order lifted the provisional measure he continued to represent Ms
Cipriano till the end.

The Portuguese judicial system had nothing
to do with any eventual hastiness of the Madeira Section of the Lawyer’s Order in deciding on this matter.

“Leonor Cipriano was
defended during all the inquiry phase by the lawyer João Grade dos
Santos but, “on the eve of the trial starting, the client dismissed the
services of the lawyer”, states SIC.Years later, after the
disappearance of little Madeleine McCann, on May 3 2007, the detective
agency Método 3 enters the scene, which then tried to recruit Leonor
Cipriano’s lawyer, João Grade do Santos, explaining to him that his help
would be very useful due to the similarities of both cases.At
the time Método 3 showed itself to be highly available, inclusively
indicating that “money for expenses was not a problem” and brought up
the “Gonçalo Amaral” theme. Only months later, already after having
refused to work for the Spanish agency did he realise that Método 3 had
an “agenda.”According to SIC this “agenda” was to get a lawyer
that would put Gonçalo Amaral “out of combat”, as in both cases the
detective seemed to want the same thing: the culpability of the parents.Faced
with the refusal from João Grade dos Santos, Método 3 approached
another lawyer – the young Marcos Aragão Correia, who had participated
in the search for Madeleine as a medium and later got involved in
investigations related with the Joana case, ending up accepting to
defend Leonor Cipriano in the trial against the five PJ inspectors from
Faro. [note from blog: we find strange the use of the verb “to defend” as Leonor Cipriano was the Plaintiff, so the adequate verb, in our opinion, should have been “to represent”]“The detectives [from
Método 3] came to me and told me – we are very worried because there is a
common element in both cases – Gonçalo Amaral – who is not interested
in looking for the children, he is only interested in incriminating the
parents. It happened in the Maddie case and also in the Joana case”,
explained Aragão Correia, quoted by SIC.The young lawyer
accepted immediately the proposal from the Spanish agency to do what
João Grade dos Santos had refused to do. “I was outraged – he reminds us
– I thought that Mr Gonçalo Amaral had a hidden interest in
systematically incriminating the mothers, without having proof against
them. “(…)Paulo Pereira Cristóvão, former PJ inspector
and one of the five arguidos from Faro, accuses Marcos Aragão Correia of
trying to make “a deal” with the arguidos, writes SIC. “And that deal
was: you all accuse Gonçalo Amaral and I will make Leonor Cipriano say
that none of you gentlemen have anything to do with this”, he explained.Marcos
Aragão Correia, heard by the journalist Pedro Coelho, does not deny the
existence the deal, but explains it was related to “outburst from one
of the arguidos”. “That arguido sent a mail to a friend of mine win
which he points the blame to Gonçalo Amaral”, denounces the lawyer.Shielding
himself behind a “secrecy agreement” which links him to Método 3,
Marcos Aragão Correia did not give the news team any more details, but
still said: “If I am taking sides for one of the parties, it is obvious
that party is giving me moral support”.Both Método 3 and the McCanns spokesperson were contacted by SIC and refused to issue any statement.”
To quote Marcos Aragão Ferreira outside court after trial “‘The target was
hit, Gonçalo Amaral was convicted'... Marcos Aragão Correia, Leonor
Cipriano's Lawyer.”

As can be seen, there is no relationship
between the Portuguese judicial system being corrupt or incompetent and
the McCanns using a lawyer without scruples to pursue their intent
against Mr Amaral.

“14. These proceedings lasted 7 months with 7
hearings from October 2008 to May 2009. In the U.K. the trial would
have been heard over 7 continuous days. Spreading the hearings over
several months significantly increases the lawyers’ costs.”

With a
significant number of witnesses from outside the country, with hearings
having to be translated, with lawyers excusing themselves for health
reasons and for having been surprisingly dismissed, with the request for
witnesses who weren’t part of the submitted list to be heard, with
decisions to appeal the refusal of hearing new witnesses, with the
introduction of requests to clarify the legitimacy of applicants we very
much doubt that in the UK these proceedings would last 7 days. In the
UK or in any other country.

Mr Bennett may counter that many of
the procedures above would not have been allowed in the UK but all of
them were in Portugal because the law states they can and that they
should be respected.

Also, looking at current murder cases in the
UK, many months elapse before one has a trial date or the trial date is
set for months in the future, lawyers are engaged from the beginning.

Where is the difference?

We
would like to note that in Portugal the lawyers are not paid by the
time a trial lasts, it is the fees for their legal work they are paid
for. They get paid by the hour they effectively work on a case.

For
example, Mr Amaral’s lawyer after having submitted the appeal is not
getting paid. If the decision is taken tomorrow or in 6 months, his fees
between submission and decision will be exactly the same, which will be
the hours he worked on the case in between these 2 times.

“15.
At the end of the proceedings, and based solely on the testimony of a
serial liar who murdered her own child in cold blood, the court
convicted Amaral of the offence of ‘filing a false report’.”

Already answered. Mr Amaral was made accountable for what he did wrong. Justice was done.

Does that tarnish his reputation? He who has never made mistake please pick up the first stone…

“16.
Those who are utterly opposed to Amaral have ‘milked’ this perverse
judicial finding for all that it’s worth, labelling this as ‘perjury’and
constantly referring to him as a ‘convicted perjurer’.”

Is the
Portuguese Judicial system now to be considered corrupt and incompetent
because of the manipulation of information done by third parties? Mr
Amaral was not convicted of perjury.

“17. Amaral brought a
perfectly proper case for ‘criminal libel’ against Marcos Aragao
Correia, after he made a series of libelous statements about Amaral. The
Portuguese judiciary would not allow him to proceed with this claim.”

Yes, this was a libel case, defamation and with the trial in a criminal court.

There is no such thing as ‘criminal libel’ in Portuguese law.As said, it's simply libel (or defamation). To distinguish between libel/defamation and civil law suit for damages please revert to reply to #2.

Under the Portuguese
law libel is a criminal offence as contemplated in article 180 of the Penal
Code, so always a crime

Such
was the case that Mr Amaral brought against Leonor Cipriano's lawyer, a
Criminal Law suit for defamation, under the referred article 180.

“Brief introductory note: The hereunder addendum belongs to a
process for criminal defamation [in Common Law, “libel” implies a
defamatory comment, either written or spoken] and vilification against
Marcos Aragão Correia filed by Dr. Gonçalo Amaral in April 2008. While
this process is at the moment stalled in the Public Ministry, a
counter-complaint filed against Dr. Gonçalo Amaral by the psychic
lawyer, in October 2008, was urged forward.The following document is published with the author's permission:JUDICIAL COURT OF FARO

PUBLIC MINISTRY SERVICES

Process 87/08.8JAFAR

1ST SECTIONMr Prosecutor,Gonçalo
Amaral, the offended party with the capacity to constitute himself as
an assistant, and better identified in the files, comes forward to
APPEND the following to the CRIMINAL COMPLAINT that was presented
against arguido Marcos Aragão, under the rights of petition and of
probatory intervention:"

In the libel case filed against Marcos
Aragão Correia, Mr Amaral did go to court and lost. He lost his case on
the 17 July 2012 in Faro Court.

The Portuguese judicial system did not deny him the right to proceed with his claim. He simply lost in court.

An unfavourable decision, not a corrupt or incompetent one. Or unfair.

“18.
As a result of the way the Portuguese judicial system has treated him,
Amaral has at times seemed close to being a ‘broken man’, he and his
wife divorced, and he has had to rely on donations for Portuguese,
British and other people even to be able to afford to carry on defending
himself.”

Maybe more as a result of how the McCann machine has
treated him. Also by using the Portuguese judicial system in a perfectly
legal and legitimate manner.

It’s called legal games and the
harsh reality is that he who has more money gets better legal help.
Nothing to do with corruption or incompetence. Just the way it is.

We
agree that he appears to be a broken man (although we really do think
he still has a lot of fight in him and doesn’t seem to be wavering in
his resolution).

Mr Amaral has unquestionably suffered enough,
more than any man ever should. But not due to corruption, incompetence
or unfairness of the Portuguese judicial system but rather because of an
efficient mean legal machine he has working against him.

The
evil is not in the system that Mr Bennett accuses without any basis to
be corrupt and incompetent but the use evil people make of it using its
known and public rules.

Mr Bennett himself has been a victim of the exact same thing in the UK.

We,
like Mr Amaral, trust in the judicial system to deal with this in the
appeal. We also trust that in the future evidence will surface that will
allow charging those responsible for the demise of a helpless child.

Then
that same judicial system Mr Bennett now criticises will be blind as it
must be and apply a severe sentence to those responsible, in a criminal
court.

It will be then up to UK courts to deal with them for financial fraud. In justice we trust. Dura lex, sed lex.

4. Corrections

We would like to make two corrections to what Mr Bennett has stated also regarding this issue.

Mr
Bennett claims were that the former Prime Minister José Sócrates is in a
high security prison and charged with crimes: “Does he not know for
example that the country's former President, Jose Socrates, who met
Gordon Brown, our Prime Minister, twice, and personally discussed the
Madeleine McCann case with him, is now remanded in a top security
Portuguese jail charged with all manner of corruption?”

José
Socrates is not a former President (saying he is that is the same
mistake as saying Brown is UK’s former King) but former Prime Minister
and we find it perfectly natural and understandable for two
Prime-Ministers of two European nations to meet and to discuss the hot
topic at the time that involved both their nations.

But what we
want to correct is that Sócrates has not been charged with anything nor
is he in a high security prison. In fact he is in preventative prison
and has NOT been charged to date.

He was given the opportunity to
have his coercive measure changed to house arrest with electronic
monitoring and he has refused. He preferred to stay under preventative
prison in Évora.

The prison in Évora is not a high security
prison but one for the police forces, military and people with special
status, such as being a former Prime-Minister. That’s why he’s in Évora
and not in Lisbon.

He will remain there until it is legally decided for him to be released.

We
must add that the preventative prison is one of the most arguable
coercive measures the Portuguese judicial system use. But however one
may or may not agree with it, one has to accept it. It is the law.

Second
correction we want to make is when Mr Bennett says that the British
government has let down Mr Amaral, he’s being as correct (both in fact
and politically) as anyone saying the Portuguese government is able to
let down any British citizen in the UK under a judicial process in the
UK.

5. Conclusion

This is not an attack on Mr Bennett. We will not accept any comment attacking Mr Bennett personally.

We
attack messages not messengers. We attack ideas not people. We carry
too many wounds while our message remains untroubled to know very well
the difference.

Our points regarding the legal aspects of points
#1 to #18 are approached in simple terms and can be verified by anyone
who researches the information available. We always stick to facts (when
we don’t we clearly assume the speculation) and we think it is the best
approach in this case.

Several points needed to be clarified and they were.

This
has nothing to do with people. Facts are what they are and they cannot
be changed nor are they subject to interpretation from us or anyone
else.

We do not call other people bonkers. It's rudeness that destroys truth seeking.

We
did not enjoy seeing former PJ inspector Barra da Costa being called
bonkers with the implication he would have lied about his info coming
from inside sources about swinging.

We did not enjoy seeing
Richard Bilton being called bonkers on Panorama because he mentioned
swinging on Panorama, although he hastily had to add it was just a
theory

We did not enjoy seeing an Anonymous being called bonkers
because he was posting about swinging before the files were released, as
per our “The Best Answer ?” post.

We did not enjoy seeing PJ being called bonkers for using “swing” as search terms on Murat’s and Malinka's computers as we showed in our “Why Swing?” post.

Especially
when we saw those who were calling all of the above bonkers have not
used the same word to those defending a pre-planned murder involving two
families who have no problem in lending their 3/4 yr old daughters to
cover-up a death nor to those saying CEOP was involved in covering up
that death as early as April 29.

About seeing these two families
involved let us just say that one is being involved because of
differences of signatures in documents we have proven have been tampered
with in our “3 Penguins in the desert post” so no information in them can be considered realistically trustworthy and the second
family is involved just because someone decided to do so without any
sort of proof.

Acknowledgement: We would like to thank Isabel
Oliveira in her important and significant contribution especially but not only with
the stated in the legal points #1 to #18. Isabel shares our concern in
correcting misunderstandings that seem to exist about Portuguese legal
matters in general and with the book trial in particular.

Thank you for another insightful post. I had never read an earlier post you reference called 'The Best Answer' which was alarming in its accuracy: the need to cover 'swinging' at the expense of what happened to Maddie. It's still shocking, even years later.

Hi Textusa,A new DCI Nichola Wall was given the task of Opreation Grange 22 Dec 2014,Remit Abduction by UK Government?My understanding is that Portugal PJ have the overall legal capacity of any prosecution in regard to the missing child Madeleine McCann, last seen alive by the parents and a Doctor friend,3 May 2007 5a Ocean Club Apartment.The UK Government seem for some reason of protection in this case, as is proven or a pure coincidence that Operation Grange began to reinvestigate the case after Mr&Mrs McCann,Rebecca Brooks,Rupert Murdoch, tired to Black Mail the UK Home Secretary for the uk police re-open the case on the couples be half,via Prime Minister David Cameron?Is it a coincidence that "Operation Grange" has been reinvestigating the case for over five years at a cost of over 11 Million Pounds to the UK tax payer alone?One can only hope Justice prevails in this case, but I have my doubts, this being the amount of collusion by UK Police force assisting persons to "Flee the Scene" after being named arquidos, travelling home with them, thereby Not allowing the judicial process to takes it's course?Imagine Scotland Yard having suspects and allowing them to depart the Country of an alleged crime?It seems as though they have been assisting them for the last five years and the UK Government is picking up the Tag on their behalf as well!!?Ludicrous situation or protection!?

Textusa thank you for your work in allowing me to understand the Portuguese court system I do agree that there has been a lot written and said about the system without taking the time to verify if the criticism stands up to the test of what is the norm for that particular system.

I however would like to look at point 8 in more detail which I think may be the source of Mr Bennets and a lot of other peoples fustrations. I recognise that you yourself don't agree with her decision and accept that your answer is based on the judges application of the letter of the law rather than the spirit of the law. I understand when you s a y "The constant decisions of the Appeal Court and Supreme Court are jurisprudence and a source of law or law. " that you mean in simple terms that the judge is not legally binded to accept these decisions but it is a source that she can refer to. ( correct me if I am wrong) That being the case I think that Mr Bennett was quite timid in his criticism of her when he says "corrupt or otherwise – the judge in the recent trial found a way to ignore these two rulings.” . Surely her first source of law when applying the spirit of the law should have been to respect the earlier judgements in the same case she was working so to ignore in favour of another source is while not illegal is at best incompetent and at worst corrupt. Add that to the value of the settlement given when no damages was proved directs me to the latter. All court services whether Irish, British, Portuguise or any other democratic country should work to the spirit of the law as well as letter of the law I think in this case this particular judge has used her own discretion to work outside the spirit of the law and as such I think Mr Bennet may be correct in his statement.

We respect fully your opinion but the truth is that point 8 is correct in the sense the judge did not use her personal discretion but decided within the scope of the law.

In UK courts are bound to follow case law, which sets a precedent for any cases which follow, to ensure consistency in judgements.

Portugal has the codified law system rather than case law to guide decisions. When matter under analysis is not defined in the letter or spirit of law then judge has resorts to what jurisprudence she deems necessary to do so.

This is a case where law is unclear, both in letter and in spirit and it is correct that it is so. The law states what the rights are but doesn’t compare rights in importance as it shouldn’t.

Your words are correct but they reach a wrong conclusion. You say rightly “surely her first source of law when applying the spirit of the law SHOULD have been to respect the earlier judgements in the same case she was working”.

It is as you say SHOULD and not HAD to. If the law stated she had to and she didn’t then there would be reason to think or either corruption and/or incompetence.

But fact is the Portuguese law doesn’t make her respect early judgements. Do note the early judgement you’re speaking of was about a Cautionary Action and not the exact same matter that is now at stake.

The Cautionary Action was simply about litigation over rights while now perceived damages are also involved.

Your opinion she SHOULD have is just an opinion and in no way merits the words with which you end your idea: “so to ignore in favour of another source is while not illegal is at best incompetent and at worst corrupt.”

You’re wrong because it’s neither. She has basically told Mr Amaral that his freedom of speech was exercised and his book was free to be published but now that the consequences have been explained to her by the McCanns and witnesses, she decided that his freedom has caused some, not major damage to the McCanns and his freedom when weighed against their right to a good name weighs less heavily, and because she deems he should not have breached what she has considered to be his duty of confidentiality, the damages will be almost those requested by the McCanns.

Nothing corrupt or incompetent about this. Just her legitimate interpretation about what was before her to decide.

Textusa thank you for taking the time to explain this. I have to say I'm with you now but I despair at how she could come to the decision she did given that little or none of the accusations made by the McCanns were proven in court we can only hope that the appeal judges see it differently.

In other words, you see no bias, no prejudice, no servility, no morosity, no incompetence in the way our justice has handled the MC Saga but I am sure you sense it, don't you? I certainly do and I am Portuguese.

Although I can appreciate the logical consistency and quality of your argument (and the shortcomings of Bennett's) I cannot help thinking it was stupid to allow the McCanns' to use our judicial system for personal vindication and reputation management.

Whatever the reason why this farce has been allowed to proceed, it smells of servility, corruption, incompetence, bias or if you prefer, "lack of cojones" - unless it turns out to be a brilliant PR exercise! We will only know that in the end (...)

Thank you for your comment and sincere apologies in answering only now.

Who could prevent the McCanns from using the Portuguese legal system, if they could afford, by whatever means, to pursue their case?

Can the Portuguese lawyers paid by the McCanns be accused of servility? Isn’t the McCann money as good as any other?

We can't see it being a brilliant tactic on the judge’s part.

On a first impression it seems to us that because of the high profile of the case the 1st Instance Court judge preferred to place on more experienced hands the decision on the main controversial issue which was the litigation between rights.

On all other issues she decided in favour of Mr Amaral. The sentence seems to show, in our opinion that she decided to leave the claim as “intact” as possible: what the McCanns asked of relevance remained “as is” for the Appeal’s Court to decide.

Eventually one can accuse the judge of having lack of legal courage when she took her decision but as we pointed out, it wasn’t corrupt or incompetent. She acted within the boundaries in which the law allowed her to.

Just like the 1st Instance Court did when deciding on the Cautionary Action (decision later overturned by the Appeal’s Court wholly in favour of Mr Amaral).

The appeal court will be the next test. Only when there are no more appeals left will we know what is the take of the Portuguese justice system on the matter.

But your comment misses the point of our post. It is not about the attitude or position of the Portuguese justice system in what concerns anything to do with Maddie.

The post was about an unfounded accusation of corruption and incompetence made against the Portuguese justice system as a whole.

About the Maddie case we have shown that it was irregular in the investigation and in one particular decision that should have been taken and wasn’t, which was to charge the parents with negligence.

In what concerns Mr Amaral we have also agreed that the way he was taken off the investigation in October 2007 was equally irregular.

But, as we said in the post, other than that we still have to find any other irregularity concerning Mr Amaral v Portuguese justice service.

That said, Melo e Castro is not the first judge to show "lack of courage".Gabriela Cunha Rodrigues was another.

Both well-to-do ladies gave the impression to go out of their ways (and their roles) to benefit the McCanns' and sink Gonçalo Amaral - a Portuguese citizen and an ex-civil servant at that. Typical "para Inglês vêr" behaviour.

Judge Melo e Castro, by deciding to go against a decision of an appeals court, went even further!

No doubt she knew the previous Appeals Court included Dr. Bruto da Costa, a Professor of Law, a former minister, ex-president of the Commission for Justice and Peace and not least an actual State Counsellor with the Presidency of the Portuguese Republic.

If this is not bias (or something more sinister) I do not know what to call it but, I will settle for "lack of courage" - as you diplomatically put it.

Melo e Castro seemed more interested in the "pret-a-porter" justice "en vogue" elsewhere in Europe than in home grown ethics and, by being so "fashionist" she brought the Portuguese Justice system into disrepute - allowing for poorly differentiated and emotionally distorted comments such as those of Tony Bennett and myself.

I can only hope the on-going McCann saga is nothing but a brilliant exercise in international public relations. A fine example of the Portuguese skilful Will operating undercover at The Collective Unconscious level but that... only time will tell.

Keep up the good work. It is always an informative pleasure to read your well-researched postings and your intelligent replies.

http://www.pressdisplay.com/pressdisplay/iphone/homepage.aspxMissing People, who advertised non missing Ricardo Firmino get £178k whilst other charities suffer!That is probably only enough to pay wages of one or two top staff anyway.Why are they so favoured? We never get a breakdown of their proclaimed success rates. Are some children on run from care homes on numerous occasions counted more than once in their statistics?

Very interesting thread started by HelenMeg on JH Forum today.http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t11679-portugal-resident#318904Initial post:

Portugal Resident HelenMeg Today at 2:15 pmInteresting comment from a reader of the http://portugalresident.com/maddie-cop-launches-appeal-against-mccann%E2%80%99s-record-damages-%E2%80%98win%E2%80%99-of-%E2%82%AC500000

Maria Versos • a month ago Have someone questioned what where the McCanns doing, staying on a three star development in Praia da Luz ? Have you seen on the police photos, what this bare apartment looks like? I am a realtor, and my english clients of this level stay in 5 Star hotels or in Private villas and, anyway, if they have children and leave for dinner without them, they engage the services of a baby sitter.Plus, in Portugal, children are most welcome in restaurants. Not having someone to look after them, the natural thing would have been to take them with.The McCans situation was therefore terribly strange, to say the least.And if you happen to be in Praia da Luz, just ask the waiters at the restaurant where they were that night, and they will tell you what kind of "life" the McCans were leading...!!!!!! you will be veeeeery surprised...I was...also strange is the fact that the McCans, faced with the death of their child, have called first Sky News and only when Sky News arrived at the place, was the police called! Conveniently organised, I would say.We portuguese have no doubts whatsoever to what happened that night. I still hope that the true emerges one of this days and that punishement will be served.I also know the McCans were supposed to be questioned separately (they had been before always questioned jointly) by the criminal police the morning after the night they flew from Portugal. Our criminal police was sure that Kate would "break down" and the truth would come forward. But they are extremelky influent people and got away with it.And thank you so mych for supporting Amaral. He is a man of honour and is beeing penalised for doing his work. I am ashamed of the portuguese government behaviour in this case (allowing the McCans to flee from Portugal on the midle of the investigation).Maria Versos

And a very interesting reply from Carry On Doctor in the thread:Re: Portugal Resident Carrry On Doctor Today at 4:31 pmReading between the lines, the author is insinuating swinging or the sharing of sexual partners. My thoughts exactly.

Not paedophilia for me, a tragic accident early on followed by a faked abduction up to protect careers and reputations. They absolutely would want to keep their kicks secret.

If the dogs in the street know what was going on in PDL with the McCanns and their 'friends', surely Scotland Yard must know it too? One wonders what's keeping them from making the connection. Abduction never happened: 'neglect ' was a ruse to hide something more sinister: saving ones skin because of swinging buried the truth of Maddie's death.

Perhaps when they next appear in Portugal,journalists can ask Gerry and Kate about their thesis on what happened to Madeleine 3 May 2007!!?Probably have to have a certain person in tow, eh Clarence!Kate,"I know what happened, I was there?", but failed to elucidate in 48 questions to the PJ?

Some news update. In case you did not know, this Summer, instead of sending Scotland Yard, David Cameron decided to visit the Portuguese Algarve himself.

The story goes that he has just interrupted his holiday because of an ear infection. So, whereas before he has always been ready to lend both his ears to Clarence Mitchell and the McCanns, the latter will have to do with just one of his ears.

Meanwhile, no signs of Scotland Yard. Either they are still working on those "samples" or perhaps just waiting for Amaral's appeal result to come through before restarting shooting their "investigation" blockbuster...

Textusa,I have been following forever literally but there are two questions for me which sit very strongly and I was wondering if you would be so kind as to tell me if you have answered them already and where I missed the answer.The first one is 'they have taken here, the fckers have taken her and then the whole pedophile accusation from then which when danger time had passed changed to lonely couple treating her as a princess.If you don't believepPedophilia was involved in this case, why did they mention it and why did Kate mention that horror scene in the book? They don't every do anything without a reason.And that Sean has developed a liking for sea bass is a real red herring to me ( no pun intended) but that was getting a message through to many - what was the mesage?

Let us answer your last question first. It was sea bass, as it could have been mackerel or tuna. Or even Kentucky Fried Chicken. They were before the fact the dog alerted to cadaver odour and they had to find an excuse.

It was sea bass that came to their mind. It proved to be lame as dogs distinguish smells like we distinguish colours. Dogs are not colourblind in the sense that they see more than just black, white, and grey but the colour range they perceive is limited.

For them to distinguish between sea bass and cadaver odour is like for us humans to distinguish between yellow and orange. We make no effort, we just do it. They do the same with odours. They do not confuse fish for cadaver.

Paedophilia is much more complex.

It has 2 stages, and the one you referring is stage 1: paedo linked to abduction. The second stage being paedo linked to Payne.

One has nothing to do with the other.

The logic to the first is simple: find a reason for Maddie to have been abducted.

The second is much more complex and we have said before that it has 3 major reasons for existing: feed distracting misinformation, punish Payne and also keep him on a short leash and send a warning to others: we have the power to brand a non-paedo as a paedo so best abide or face our fury.

To answer your question, to raise the paedo possibility in those first few hours was with the same intent as the Smith sighting: to make something that wasn’t real a reality. In the first instance to help make the abduction real in the last to make the abductor.

This is where Kate uses the F word as to whom would have taken Maddie.

I am not sure if I signed up to JH Forum back in 2008/2009. I do not have any record of it.

I probably did as I signed up to lots of Maddie related sites at the time.

I do not know if I'm a user at JH Forum and if I am I don't know how to log in nor do I want to find out.

I don't think I ever posted there then but not sure of that. Just saying this as some odd comment may be found in the forum's archive and I don't want to be called a liar.

Outside that possibility, which would be over 5 years ago and we becoming a team, Textusa has never signed up to JH Forum to place a comment nor intends to.

Witnessing what we have witnessed from the accuser on other matters we realise it will be an accusation it will be thrown against us henceforth. Being accused wrongly of saying what we haven't said and of being what we aren't is something we've grown used to and has never bothered us.

If you think we're missing something, we welcome the heads-up. The worst you can hear from us is us not agreeing but that is a risk that exists to all those who risk putting out their opinions out there.

If we all agreed, there would be no need to write as whatever was to be written would be known in advance.

Criticism, when rightful and with good intent, doesn't put anyone down but is a constructive way to correct the path of one's journey.

Ridiculous are only those who say they accept criticism but when it comes, they don't. We sincerely hope you don't include us in such a group of people.

Just realised I am as interested in this case as I was when Madeleine was initially declared 'abducted'. I think that this afternoon I might trawl back through some of the posts on this site - as even though I have read many of them - there are still more gems for me to discover.

I hope something is happening behind the scenes... somewhere.... dont want another 8 years of this - or even 12 months..Look forward to new posts as and when they arrive.

Textusa's I hope you don't mind me going a bit off topic but I have been reading your old blogs on crimewatch which prompted me to watch it again. One thing I missed first time was that they said that 2 men were seen arguing about 1 hour after the alarm was raised. I don't know if you ever mentioned these 2 or their relevance to the case but I would appreciate your opinion on them. Surely they wouldn't be suggesting that the "abductours" we're still hanging about an hour after the abduction

That encounter certainly didn't come from any Tapas statements, or indeed, any other statements we can recall. No Tapas staff said this either.

We, unlike we have said with CrècheDad, cannot say this encounter didn't happen. However, we don't find anything suspicious about 2 men talking at around 22 pm outside.

What would be suspicious about 2 men talking loudly?

We're sure other similar encounters happened all over the Algarve and probably also in Luz somewhere.

What we would find strange would be for 2 men involved in an abduction to be seen talking outside instead of getting as fast as they could away from the crime scene. Ridiculous that anyone involved would hang around, making themselves conspicuous.

We would be more inclined to quiz the witness if we were SY.

We have witnessed so many lies by so many witnesses, it's almost impossible to rely on anyone for truth. Even SY.

We don't give much relevance to this episode. For us it has one of 2 objectives, or both. First, to show work on SY's part, showing they came up with details PJ missed and so justify the millions spent and the other to find a "public" excuse to haul in to be heard most of the 4 men who were heard in July 2014.

Now this is interesting inasmuch as it provides some food for thought.

Blacksmith - seen by some as a controversial analyst at times - has this to say in a thought-provoking article he published recently.It highlights the "reputation management" aspects of the case from its inception.

Well, we all knew that intuitively - Clarence Mitchell and his PR associations - but here are the details - which I am sure Textusa knew but some of us might have missed. I did.

May I quote? Here we go ...copy + paste ...

"She Kate McCann) and (Lori) Campbell constructed the story together before sending it on to the Mirror’s London offices. It stated as official fact:

Police had specific evidence from the apartment that the child was still alive when she left

Madeleine was kidnapped, as the toy she had fallen asleep with was left on a ledge placed too high for a child to reach proved.

There was a window of less than five minutes for a kidnapper to pounce - not enough time to kill her and clean up

Police did not believe blood found in the apartment was Madeleine's as it was not consistent with signs of a struggle

The McCanns had been told in a secret meeting with police within days of May 4 that the child was alive when she left the apartment

The Mirror then invented “a police source” to disguise the fact that the source of this stuff was Kate McCann herself. The supposed police source was quoted as saying:

"Although there has been much speculation about a 'lost hour' in which Madeleine could have been taken...the kidnapping must have been meticulously planned. Police found no fingerprints or DNA on the Cuddle Cat or in the room, indicating the intruder wore gloves.."

"To disguise your sources is one thing. For a historic national newspaper with a proud tradition to do so by deliberately inventing a police source and putting fictitious claims in its mouth about an important crime is something else - a deception and a betrayal of readership trust from which a paper can rarely, if ever, recover.

Criminal deception usually catches up with you in the end, whether you are a newspaper or a pair of pathological liars. Campbell's dodgy journalist partner Ross Hall passed her record of Kate McCann's claims on to the News of the World, which is now dead."

We consider that Kate McCann, Gerry McCann and Clarence Mitchell to be mere puppets in this sick game.

About Mitchell already in 2009 we were very clear with what we think his role in the saga has been with our post "Clarence Mitchell - The Luckiest, Unluckiest Turd of All"http://textusa.blogspot.pt/2009/08/clarence-mitchell-luckiest-unluckiest.html

The decision taking and strategic planning takes place much more upstream than the 3 people above mentioned. Imagine all a chess game and these 3 are pawns while decisions are made in our opinion not even by the players moving the pieces but at the English Chess Federation itself.

That is as far from any capability of deciding Kate, Gerry and Clarence are in reality.

Giving them any capability of deciding is to help the misinformation campaign as it "downgrades" the level where it really happens.

It baffles the mind to see how it is believed by many how 2 doctors and a government expendable are able to bend the will of a British Prime-Minister.

If Clarence was that almighty wouldn't he manage to run in the elections where he would be sure he would get elected? Doesn't that alone show how little power he really has? In our opinion he has none and never had any.

Nor does he run any McCann PR campaign. In our opinion he is part of it, doesn't run it.

So when it's said "She Kate McCann) and (Lori) Campbell constructed the story together" we couldn't disagree more.

Thanks for your thoughts Textusa. What you say is certainly a strong possibility - Ideology and Cultural Hegemony work in mysterious ways - almost telepathically...

That said, I suppose it may be fair to say - on the basis of the "arguments" provided by Blacksmith - that whoever was pulling the strings behind the media screen; the puppets-on-the strings themselves - could have been those described by Blacksmith. Surely they must have had a role of some sort - unless the "evidence" provided by B. is of the Procrustean type.

B. inferences on Lori Campbell, seem fair to me - she did send her article "Alive When Taken" to the Mirror who had them published. Kate McCann involvement, however, can only be inferred on the basis of her close association with Lori.

Personally, I don't think Kate is much of a strategic and creative thinker (according to some sources, J.K. Rolling helped her with "Madeleine") so, it would have to be Gerry or indeed as you suspect someone above in the game's hierarchy.

Thought-provoking your views on "Fox" Mitchell. I now have a look at the post you suggest. Thank you!

I have been looking over old footage and pictures of the couple in the days and weeks after the child disappeared and with the exception of the rag doll photo which ironside wrote about they are not just happy their deliriously happy. Like a couple on honeymoon. Unless these 2 people have been given 110% assurance that they would be protected there is absolutely no way they could have behaved that way. Narcissistic they may be but they still would have been terrified unless they were totally convinced by the assurance they were given. This is why I'm with you Textusa that the people involved in this are powerful powerful people

Textusa is probably on the right track - that much has become apparent almost from the start of this saga. That said, here we were addressing Blackmith's trail of thought in case you missed the point. No problem.

Anonymous 17.08.00It seems as though Black Smith Bureau has thrown in the Towel on the Madeleine McCann case,either that or he has been trying to out the non Mc supporters as per his last post which he states has been his task or has he been got at?

Comment from Pamalam we thought best to bring over with thanks to her for all her hard work:

£5Pamalam *12 hours agoHere is the £5 that I have just won on a scratch card. I am waiting in anticipation for your appeal Dr Amaral. ********** Would anyone be interested in reading all of the old Donation/ comments? They also have all screenshots linked to each comment. If so here are the links ********* Comments 01 to 499: http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/_gafund1.htm ********** Comments 500 to 999: http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/_gafund500.htm ********** Comments 1,000 to 1,499: http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/_gafund1000.htm **********Comments 1,500 to 1,999: http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/_gafund1500.htm ********** Comments 2,000 to 2,499: http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/_gafund2000.htm

Mamma mia! Talk about the devil ! After his comical attempt to become an MP for his good friend Cameron, "puppet-on-a-string" Clarence Mitchell "has left" Burson-Marsteller - the global PR company of which he was a director - to became self-employed. Suck that!

Has the McCann Saga - and Mitchell unconditiona£ support of the couple - led to his redundancy from the blue-chip company?

Could it be that Burson-Marsteller global name was being tarnished by Mitchell's long-time association with the two célèbre "swingers" and "child neglecter's"?

Portuguese media is buzzing today with the story that British prime minister David Cameron is on his way back to Portugal - not this time in his holiday FitFlops - but for a meeting with Portuguese prime minister Pedro Passos Coelho that some sources say he himself requested.

Officially, Sábado says “the conversation between the two heads of government will involve European questions at a time that Passos Coelho has reinforced his role in the EU, particularly calling for rapid reforms to European institutions”.

Unofficially, it is anybody’s guess.

National media alludes to the fact that Cameron recently defied his country’s opinion polls to sweep the board in May’s elections and decimate the Socialist opposition.

It was the kind of victory that Passos Coelho could be keen to learn from as he faces his own election battles here - and as Expresso points out, does not appear to have much hope in gaining a majority.

Indeed Expresso casts doubt on claims that David Cameron requested the meeting at all.

As Portugal’s media mulls over what “mutual interests” the pair might really be discussing, now could be the time to lay the long-running and expensive dual police investigations into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann finally to rest.

Certainly, there has been no news on this front for months.

But for the moment all that is certain is that the two prime ministers will be meeting next Friday in the prime minister’s official residence in São Bento, and that a photograph of them shaking hands and looking chummy may add some useful glow to Passos’ lacklustre election campaign.

Hi Textusa,10.20.The head of Portugal should be aware of the last time an Official UK Prime Minister came to discuss EU details as it led to the dismissal of Goncalo Amaral and as Carlos Anjos quoted that Clarence lies with as many teeth he had in his head, one would hope Passos Coelho remove Daves teeth with some pliers(sarcastic joke) to find out the true reason for the meeting?Do not trust this snake in the grass,as he is not visiting Portugal for anything but his or cronies he knows behalf?

John O’Connor said the spiralling cost of the four-year investigation and the seeming lack of progress meant the Met must now ask itself whether resources should be focused elsewhere.

He added: “If there are no firm leads, and by that I mean no substantial operational things like active surveillance on suspects, then I’d have thought they should be considering winding it down now.”

His comments come as a Sun investigation today reveals the Met’s inquiry into Madeleine’s disappearance from the Portuguese resort of Praia da Luz in May 2007 has cost taxpayers almost £11million.

At the current rate it will top £12million by April — more than double the £5million promised by David Cameron when Operation Grange was launched in May 2011.

The task force, which at its height was 37 strong, has yet to make a single arrest.

Tens of thousands of pounds have been spent on flights to Portugal and to investigate other sightings around the globe.

Mr O’Connor added: “You can’t keep chasing shadows. Chasing sightings all over the world. It depends on whether the detectives are making any real progress. For me it needs to be reviewed by a senior officer.

“The Met’s rank and file would be thinking, ‘Are there more recent cases that could be progressed with the right resources?’ It’s about priorities.”

The initial Portuguese investigation into three-year-old Madeleine’s abduction was marred by blunders.

Officers made the catastrophic mistake of deciding parents Kate and Gerry were the key suspects — and so failed to take elementary steps to secure evidence that might have caught the real abductors.

They failed to seal off the family’s apartment, allowing the crime scene to become hopelessly contaminated.

They also failed to put out a global missing persons report for five days and did not bother to set up checkpoints in and around the Algarve.

In July 2008 the Portuguese authorities admitted there was no evidence against Kate and Gerry and said the unsolved case was to be closed.

Then in May 2011, following a campaign by Kate and Gerry that was backed by The Sun, the PM told Scotland Yard to launch its own investigation, called Operation Grange.

It cost around £2million in its first year. By 2013 that had risen to £4.8million — then £7.4million in April 2014.

The figure stood at £9.8million in April and is now thought to have reached £10.8million. It is projected to hit £12.2million by April 2016.

In 2014 alone Met staff took 67 return flights to Portugal at a cost of £16,000. The bulk of the rest of Grange’s costs come from salaries, overtime and premises expenses.

There are currently 30 police and support staff working on the hunt for Madeleine, who would now be 12. The inquiry is headed by Detective Chief Inspector Nicola Wall.

In March the soaring costs and lack or progress prompted Met Police Federation chairman John Tully to question whether the investigation should continue. He said: “We no longer have the resources to conduct specialist inquiries all over the world which have nothing to do with London.

“It is surprising to see an inquiry like the McCann investigation ring-fenced. I’ve heard a few rumblings of discontent about it from lots of sources.”

A source close to the McCanns said yesterday: “Kate and Gerry are eternally grateful to the Metropolitan Police for making Operation Grange possible.

“They are pleased so many officers are still looking for Madeleine.”

There are currently 155 children on the Missing Kids UK website, including Madeleine. Research shows an average of £2,415 is spent investigating a missing child.

Anonymous 2 Sep 2015, 08:47:00, there's an interesting chronology at the end of article:

‘I know what happened to Maddie’

2011

— McCann plea to PM

— Met off to Algarve

MAY 3: Fourth anniversary of Madeleine McCann’s disappearance.

MAY 12: The Sun publishes open letter from Kate and Gerry asking the PM for independent inquiry. The next day Mr Cameron promises “new action” involving the Metropolitan Police.

SEPTEMBER 9: Scotland Yard detectives hold first meetings with police chiefs in Portugal.

NOVEMBER: Met officers fly to Barcelona to meet Spanish cops as part of their probe.

2012

— Poster of their girl ‘at 9’

— Portugal rules out probe

APRIL 25: Police release computer-generated image of what Madeleine would look like five years after she vanished, aged nearly nine. The picture features prominently in a new poster appeal launched by Kate and Gerry.

APRIL 26: Portuguese attorney general rules out reopening their own investigation into the kidnapping, saying there is no new evidence to justify it.

2013

— 41 new leads

— Suspect’s e-fit

MAY: Met team says it has identified a number of possible suspects. It is later revealed there are 41.

OCTOBER: A BBC Crimewatch appeal shows an e-fit of a man seen at Praia da Luz carrying a blonde-haired child aged three or four.

2014

— Dogs in scrub

— 4 men quizzed

MAY: Search specialists from the Met arrive in Praia da Luz.

JUNE: Sniffer dogs and radar used to examine scrubland at resort.

JULY: Officers interview four Portuguese suspects, including one man of Russian origin.

Similar article in Daily Mail http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3219114/Bill-Scotland-Yard-investigation-Madeleine-McCann-disappearance-hits-11MILLION-no-arrests-former-police-chief-calls-end.html

It was just the opposite of the situation outlined in the Sun. The PJ did not immediately focus on the parents. The mistake they made, according to GA was handling the parents "with tweezers"If their friends and others had told the truth about that night, the PJ would have solved the case. If witnesses lie, any investigation is thrown off track.By refusing to participate in a requirement of the Portuguese process; a reconstitution of the night in question, the T9 brought the investigation to a halt.Yet again, the fact it was one of the most intense and expensive Portuguese investigation is conveniently left unstated.

Bill for Scotland Yard investigation into Madeleine McCann disappearance hits £11MILLION... but after no arrests are made former police chief calls for it to end

• Ex Flying Squad chief has suggested the probe should be wound down • Comes after it was revealed £11million has been spent investigating case• Met tasked with finding Madeleine in an inquiry called Operation Grange• Team of 31 British detectives are exclusively working to find the girl

A former police chief has called for the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann to be wound up.

Ex head of the Metropolitan Police's Flying Squad, John O'Connor, has questioned whether probe should continue after it was revealed Scotland Yard has spent £11million on the case but have made no arrests.

The Metropolitan Police was tasked with investigating the disappearance after Madeleine's family made a personal plea to David Cameron in 2011.

Madeleine was just three when she vanished from her family's holiday apartment while her parents ate dinner nearby.

Kate and Gerry McCann have fought a tireless campaign to find their missing daughter since, regularly appealing to police to keep the investigation into her disappearance active.

A team of 31 British detectives are working exclusively to find the girl, who vanished from her parents’ holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, Portugal eight years ago, with the inquiry codenamed Operation Grange.

Now, according to the Sun, the Met's inquiry into Madeleine's disappearance has cost £11million, with money spent on flights to Portugal, salaries, overtime and premises expenses but no arrests have been made.

They also report that if spending on the case continues at the current rate, the bill will top £12million by April - more than double the £5million promised by David Cameron when Operation Grange launched in 2011.

Mr O'Connor told the newspaper's Tom Wells: 'If there are no firm leads, and by that I mean no substantial operational things like active surveillance on suspects, then I'd have thought they should be considering winding it down.

'You can't keep chasing shadows. Chasing sightings all over the world. It depends on whether the detectives are making any real progress. For me, it needs to be reviewed by a senior officer.'

His comments echo those of Metropolitan Police Federation chairman John Tully, who earlier this year also called for the probe to be axed and the detectives reassigned to other investigations in the UK.

He said that officers in London are bemused why they are working round-the-clock fighting the threat from Islamic State-inspired jihadists and solving murders while the Operation Grange detectives are barred from helping.

Mr Tully explained: ‘It is time to re-focus on what we need to do to keep London safe. We no longer have the resources to conduct specialist inquiries all over the world which have nothing to do with London.

‘It is surprising to see an inquiry like the McCann investigation ring-fenced. I have heard a few rumblings of discontent about it from lots of sources.'

Even though Madeleine’s parents Kate, 47, and Gerry, 46, live in Rothley, Leicestershire, Scotland Yard was handed the investigation because of its expertise in investigating complex murder cases.

Police chiefs ‘ring-fenced’ the inquiry to prevent officers working on other case, even though the force has been forced to make £600million in cuts over four years.

Months after the three-year-old vanished, Leicestershire Constabulary was awarded two grants by the Home Office to help fund their efforts.

In 2008 they received £525,000 and were awarded a further £221,000 the following year before the case was handed over to Metropolitan Police.

David Cameron set out a budget of £5million upon the establishment of Operation Grange in 2011, which has been headed up by Detective Chief Inspector Nicola Wall since December.

In its first year, the unit cost close to £2million, with the vast majority of expenses attributed to police officer and staff pay.

Between 2012 and 2013, the most expensive leg of the investigation to date, £2.7million was spent on transport, salaries, overtime and premises cost.

The figures had risen to £4.8million by 2013 and then £7.4million in 2014. This April the operation had cost £9.8million and it is now thought to be at £10.8million.

The Sun reports that the projected figure will be £12.2million by April 2016.

The McCanns also enlisted the services of a small team of private investigators to help with the search.

Since the girl, who would now be 11, vanished, every possible theory has been explored, including that she was kidnapped by a paedophile, killed during a botched burglary and her body dumped, snatched by traffickers and sold to a childless couple and that she wandered out of the apartment and died in a tragic accident.

However, not one shred of proof of what happened to Madeleine has been uncovered, though the McCanns are said to be eternally grateful to the Met for their investigation.

Posted by portugalpress on September 02, 2015Second British police source slams €15 million Maddie probe

A second British police source has called for “time out” in the hugely expensive hunt for missing Madeleine McCann.

With costs of four-year-old Operation Grange now at almost €15 million - over twice the amount pledged by British prime minister David Cameron when the investigation was launched in 2011 - former Flying Squad boss John O’Connor has told the UK’s Sun newspaper that Scotland Yard should “stop chasing shadows”.

His comments come six months after Metropolitan Police Federation chairman John Tully admitted police in UK were “baffled” as to why they are being kept on in the seemingly endless Maddie inquiry.

And by coincidence they come days before David Cameron is due back in Portugal for private talks with prime minister Pedro Passos Coelho.

Speculation as to what the two PMs will have on their agenda has already piqued the interest of the Portuguese press, but for the Sun O’Connor’s views come as the paper’s own investigations reveal the spiralling costs of Operation Grange are expected to hit €16.2 million (£12 million) by April, and there has still not been one arrest nor do there appear to be any firm leads.

As O’Connor told the paper: “You can’t keep chasing shadows. Chasing sightings all over the world. It depends on whether detectives are making any real progress. For me it (the investigation) needs to be reviewed by a senior officer”.

Met federation boss John Tully said much the same thing in March, adding that it was time for Scotland Yard to “refocus” and concentrate instead on keeping London safe “from the increasing threat of terrorism at home”.

Here, PJ police are famous for playing their cards close to their chests. Last week national director Pedro do Carmo told the Resident that Portuguese costs in the hunt that began eight years ago “cannot be quantified”.

“We don’t have budgets for specific investigations”, he explained, adding that, unlike the UK - where Grange has a 30-strong team working full time - the PJ team in Porto running the Portuguese hunt is not exclusively working on the British toddler’s disappearance.

“It has other cases”, he told us. “Other disappearances. None of them children”.

Carmo said the Portuguese investigation was analysed regularly.

“If it comes to a point where there is nothing more that we think we can do, if there is no perpetrator of the crime to be found, then the next step would be to archive”, he agreed.But for the time being, “there is no deadline”.

“We are still working with the Metropolitan Police”, he stressed, and there has been an “enormous effort” in terms of PJ resources in the joint police collaboration.

As UK media follows-up the Sun’s exclusive this morning - focusing on the ever increasing millions of British taxpayers’ money spent on an inquiry that seems to be going nowhere - the paper ends it story revealing “there are 155 children on the Missing Kids UK website, including Madeleine. Research shows an average of £2,415 (€3,200) is spent investigating a missing child”.

John O’Connor is a former Scotland Yard commander whose comments and opinions are regularly carried by British newspapers.

They certainly do have friends in powerful places eh,why? Who is protecting them and for what reason?Like Goncalo Amaral has stated we probably will not know until MI 5/6 stop covering up the evidence on the communications they have,phone records, text messages, etc.I Do not trust Prime Minister David Cameron due to his heavy association to Rupert Murdoch,Andy Coulson,Rebekha Brooks and their cohorts Sky, dodgy Dave met Rupert on his yacht before awarding him exclusivity to TV rights, worth how much?

A spokesman said the couple accepted police could not continue to fund an investigation indefinitely and have set aside cash to continue the search themselves

The parents of Madeleine McCann are preparing for the police probe into their daughter’s disappearance to be shelved, their spokesman said today.

Kate and Gerry McCann continue to pump thousands of pounds into a special fund for use when the official investigation, codenamed Operation Grange and launched more than four years ago, finally ends.

Family spokesperson Clarence Mitchell said today: “They realise it cannot go on forever.”

He added: “Kate and Gerry remain incredibly grateful to the Met Police for their continuing work and effort and are grateful to everyone who continues to make Operation Grange possible.

“The Government and police make the decision about funding, it is not Kate and Gerry’s role.”

He told how former GP Kate and heart doctor Gerry, both 37, of Rothley, Leics, had moved money from the publicly-backed Find Maddie Fund into a special account in anticipation of having to finance the hunt for their daughter themselves.

Mr Mitchell said: “In a common sense and practical move, they have kept some money back from the Find Madeleine Fund in case it is needed for an ongoing search.”

A source close to the family said: “Kate and Gerry firmly believe Madeleine could still be alive and when the police investigation ends, they have vowed to continue looking for her.

"They don’t know when this will be, there has been so suggestion yet, but they want to be ready and have set aside huge chunks of money for this reason.”

Three-year-old Maddie was snatched during a family holiday in Portugal’s Praia da Luz in May 2007. She would now be aged 12.

As Maddie’s parents brace themselves for being told Operation Grange will end, the family source said: “Kate and Gerry know the investigation will come to an end at some point, especially with police budget cuts but they haven’t been advised when.”

A Home Office spokesperson said: “The Home Office remains committed to supporting the search for Madeleine McCann.

"Over the last four years we have given the Metropolitan Police the resources they say they need to investigate her disappearance, and we continue to do so.”

Sources in Portugal today insisted there was no evidence to suggest Operation Grange was going to be shelved in the short or medium term.

The British investigation into missing Madeleine McCann is still "live" and is not about to be wound down, sources have revealed.

The news comes after ex-Metropolitan Police officer John O'Connor yesterday questioned whether the hunt for the missing child was a good use of resources.

It has been claimed the Scotland Yard operation has already cost the taxpayer £11 million but there have not yet been any arrests.

But well-placed sources in Portugal insisted there was no evidence to suggest Operation Grange was going to be shelved in the short or medium term.

And they said they were expecting to receive a new international letter of request shortly from UK authorities - the second since DCI Nicola Wall took over from previous Operation Grange boss Andy Redwood at the end of last year but the first she will have been involved in preparing.

The regular meetings DCI Redwood held with his Portuguese counterparts in the Algarve city of Faro have been put on hold since the takeover.

Her successor is understood to have asked police in Portugal to put on hold some of the work they were undertaking while she reviewed outstanding requests and the way she wanted to progress in the future.

Responding to grumbles about the cost of Scotland Yard’s probe and fresh claims it should be wound down, the Portuguese source insisted: “Nothing is going to be shelved.

“Co-operation right now between the British and the Portuguese police is at a moment of great synchronisation.”

Portugal’s Attorney General’s Office, which in May confirmed it had so far received five British requests for international cooperation on the Madeleine McCann case including one in January 2015, did not respond to emails today.

But insiders said they were expecting to receive a new request shortly.

The Scotland Yard inquiry is running separately to a Portuguese probe into Madeleine’s May 3 2007 disappearance.

The Portuguese investigation was reopened in May 2014 at the request of the country’s Policia Judiciaria police force - more than five years after their original probe had been shelved.

The reopening of the probe coincided with news a former employee at the Ocean Club holiday resort where Madeleine disappeared had been identified as a suspect.

Recovering heroin addict Euclides Monteiro, a convicted burglar, died in a tractor accident in 2009.

His widow Luisa Rodrigues was interviewed by Portuguese detectives but insisted he was an innocent man and has been fighting to get authorities to confirm they have now ruled him out as a suspect.

Scotland Yard, tasked with investigating Madeleine’s disappearance after Madeleine’s family made a personal plea to David Cameron in 2011, have come to focus on the theory she was killed during a bungled burglary.

John O’Connor, ex-head of the Met Police’s Flying Squad said yesterday as it was revealed the hunt for Madeleine has cost British taxpayers almost £11 million: “You can’t keep chasing shadows.

“If there are no firm leads, and by that I mean no substantial operational things like active surveillance on suspects, then I’d have thought they should be considering winding it down now.”

His comments echoed those made in March by Met Police Federation chairman John Tully.

He said at the time: “We no longer have the resources to conduct specialist inquiries all over the world which have nothing to do with London.

“It is surprising to see an inquiry like the McCann investigation ring-fenced.

“I’ve heard a lot of rumblings of discontent about it from lots of sources.”

A source close to the McCanns was quoted as saying: “Kate and Gerry are eternally grateful to the Metropolitan Police for making Operation Grange possible.

“They are pleased so many officers are still looking for Madeleine.”

In May, Portugal’s Attorney General’s Office revealed: “Since August 2012, the Public Prosecution Service of Portimao has received five British requests for international cooperation in criminal matters, the last of which has been received on January 2015.

“Three of these requests have been already executed and their pieces of execution were returned to the requesting authorities. The execution of two of them is still pending.

The Prosecutor General’s Office does not provide information on the content of the requests presented by the British authorities.”

After a very quick browse of this article, I noted the following comments: " Responding to grumbles about the cost of Scotland Yard's probe and fresh claims it should be wound down, a Portuguese source insisted: 'Nothing is going to be shelved.Co-operation right now between the British and the Portuguese police is at a moment of great synchronisation.'

Scotland Yard detectives investigating the disappearance of Madeleine McCann stayed at £200-A-NIGHT hotels while in Portugal

Met detectives are searching for Madeleine who went missing in Portugal Their probe launched in 2011 has already cost Scotland Yard £11millionNow believed officers have stayed at 5-star hotels costing £200 a night This is despite cheaper hotels also available close to investigation scene

British police hunting for Madeleine McCann have been staying in five star hotels in Portugal where rooms cost up to £200 a night, it has been reported.

The officers are part of Operation Grange, which was set up by the Metropolitan Police after Madeleine's parents Kate and Gerry made a personal plea to David Cameron to search for their daughter, who went missing while on holiday eight years ago.

Thirty-one police and support staff are still trying to find the missing child, who would now be 12.

But after it was revealed that Operation Grange has cost £11million since it launched in 2011, it has now emerged that officers working in Portugal are staying at luxury resorts despite there being cheaper accommodation available near to the investigation scene.

According to the Sun, officers have stayed at the £180-a-night Ria Park resort, while quizzing suspects at Faro Police Station, which is a 20 minute drive away.

They are also said to have used the £200-a-night Hotel Dona Filipa, which is close to some of Portugal's best golf courses.

However, Scotland Yard said that no officers are permanently based in Portugal and that hotels are booked in accordance with procedure.

A spokesman said: 'Officers stay in hotels when visiting Portugal and they are booked by the MPS Travel Services in accordance with agreed Government rates which aim to ensure best value is obtained.'

Last year, British police went to the Algarve a number of times to examine the scene and interviewed four local suspects and various witnesses.

They are said to have taken 67 return flights to Portugal at a cost of £16,000.

The bulk of the cost of the operation comes from salaries, overtime and property expenses but still no arrests have been made.

Responding to grumbles about the cost of Scotland Yard's probe and fresh claims it should be wound down, a Portuguese source insisted: 'Nothing is going to be shelved.

'Co-operation right now between the British and the Portuguese police is at a moment of great synchronisation.'

Portugal's Attorney General's Office, which in May confirmed it had so far received five British requests for international cooperation on the Madeleine McCann case including one in January 2015, did not respond to emails yesterday.

But insiders said they were expecting to receive a new request shortly.

The Scotland Yard inquiry is running separately to a Portuguese probe into Madeleine's disappearance.

The Portuguese investigation was reopened in May 2014 at the request of the country's Policia Judiciaria police force - more than five years after their original probe had been shelved.

The reopening of the probe coincided with news a former employee at the Ocean Club holiday resort where Madeleine disappeared had been identified as a suspect.

Recovering heroin addict Euclides Monteiro, a convicted burglar, died in a tractor accident in 2009.

His widow Luisa Rodrigues was interviewed by Portuguese detectives but insisted he was an innocent man and has been fighting to get authorities to confirm they have now ruled him out as a suspect.

Confirmation that the appeal has been accepted by the Appellate Court has been received today from the lawyer. Once again, thank you so very much to everyone who has made a contribution. We will keep you informed.

You are hereby notified, regarding the above referenced case file , of the acceptance of appeal as well as the contents of the order issued in the EP (Electronic Process) , with the reference number 338001289 (Pgs 2382 of the PP (Paper Copy) , of which a copy is attached.

Moreover you are notified that the case proceedings will be sent to the Tribunal da Relação de Lisboa on the 10.07.2015.

-------------------------------------------------------Doc 2:

Case: 1454/09.5tvlsb

Conclusion: 02/09/2015

CLS

Within the scope of article 617, N1 of the CPC (Portuguese Civil Processual Code) and reemitting to the grounds of the decision, I conclude that the nullities pointed out in the in the decisions rendered in the appeal are not verified, and the sentencing is maintained as issued.

Appeal:

I accept the filed appeals, since they meet the deadlines, have been submitted by those with authority to do so and because the decision is appealable. (Article 629, 631 and 641 all of the new CPC).The “request “ is of appeal (Article 645, Section a) ), and will be elevated in the next proceedings with a mere non suspensive effect (Article 647, n 1).

Notify and I determine the elevation of the proceedings to the Venerable Tribunal da Relação de Lisboa (Lisbon’s Relação Court – Lisbon’s Appeal Court )

“Within the scope of article 617, N1 of the CPC (Portuguese Civil Processual Code) and reemitting to the grounds of the decision, I conclude that the nullities pointed out in the in the decisions rendered in the appeal are not verified, and the sentencing is maintained as issued.”

It seems that with the submission of the appeal, Mr Amaral’s legal team asked for the annulment of the sentence, or most probably the entire trial, on a technicality.

Meaning, in the opinion of this team, there were grounds for the trial to not have taken place or that something occurred during it that made it null.

If the reasons for annulment were to be verified then the sentencing would be totally void.

We don’t know what the arguments presented were but we do know that the court didn’t agree them and rejected the claim. It is not possible to appeal this decision.

This means that 1st Instance Court sentence remains valid as valid it is that it can be appealed.

In very plain terms. Mr Amaral's legal team proposed for the game to be stopped and court said, no, there's no grounds to stop game, let's continue.

Memory is short to some people. They apparently forgot that the McCann legal team has once filed an appeal to the Portuguese Supreme Court to see it be refused.

This document is officially showing that Mr Amaral’s appeal, submitted when it was submitted, by who was supposed to submit it, has been formally accepted by the Appeal Court for due analysis and decision.

Posted by portugalpress on September 03, 2015 Rush of UK “Maddie” stories precedes British PM’s visit to Portugal tomorrow

Quite what is behind the sudden rush of Maddie stories in the UK media this week is unclear, but one aspect is certain, the buzz has come as UK prime minister David Cameron heads back to Portugal, for a meeting with Passos Coelho in São Bento tomorrow.

Billed officially as a conversation to discuss European affairs of mutual interest, it had barely been announced last week than mainstream media in UK launched into this new Maddie frenzy.

Suggesting the €15 million Operation Grange probe into the toddler’s disappearance was due to be shelved after four fruitless years (click here), it then lurched into protestations that this could not be further from the truth and on to new “shock horrors” today, alleging that Grange detectives “spent £200 a night at 5-star hotels” on their fact-finding visits to Portugal.

The bulk of the stories seem to have been coming from the pro-Tory Sun, though they have been followed up, almost in synchronisation, by rival tabloids the Mirror and Daily Mail.

On the basis that there is no smoke without fire, Portuguese media has joined the fray, with national tabloid Correio da Manha reminding readers that it was David Cameron who “responded to a direct appeal from the parents of Madeleine McCann” to set up the hugely expensive Grange inquiry in the first place.

With a spokesman for the McCann parents reportedly saying Kate and Gerry accept Grange “could not last forever” but will continue searching for their daughter, whatever happens, it is difficult to understand where all this renewed media excitement is leading.

Certainly, the Portuguese inquiry - run out of Porto - shows no signs of closure, with national director of the PJ Pedro do Carmo telling the Resident last week that the investigation remains “dynamic” and that the unit is still working closely with British counterparts.

Thus eyes are on tomorrow, when Cameron, under fire over Britain’s stand against fleeing migrants, is due in Lisbon for those talks of “mutual interest”.

UPDATE: As this story went up, a small announcement on the Projecto Justiça Gonçalo Amaral blogsite gives another clue to the sudden media razzmatazz. Could it have been to hide the announcement that Gonçalo Amaral's appeal against the record amount of damages awarded against him in the civil case taken out by the McCanns has finally been accepted by Lisbon's Appellate Court?

The low-key announcement simply thanks "everyone who has made a contribution".

As the news went out, the gofundme appeal - set up by a British single mother to raise money for Amaral's legal costs - has raised £38,205 (almost €52,500), with multiple people apparently contributing on a regular basis.

The latest contributor, Peter Mac, has just posted: "The mystery of the sudden flurry of stupid "Grange is / is not going to be wound down" stories in the tabloids is exposed. News about the Appeal going ahead has been neatly kept out of any of the British press".

Today, we have discussed EU reform and the migration crisis - says Cameron following his meeting with Portugal's PM. courtesy of https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/migration-and-eu-reform-pm-statement-in-lisbon

I do wonder if this is all they discussed or whether they managed a few minutes on another matter?

PORTUGUESE POLICE REVEAL BRITISH INVESTIGATION INTO DISAPPEARANCE OF MADELEINE MCCANN IS STILL LIVE AFTER SCOTLAND YARD MAKES FRESH REQUEST FOR INFORMATIONPortuguese police reveal British investigation into disappearance of Madeleine McCann is still live after Scotland Yard makes fresh request for information newsThe revelation comes days after it was reported the Met had spent £11million pursuing the case, but haven't made a single arrest - sparking criticism from the former head of the Flying Squad.

Portuguese police reveal British investigation into disappearance of Madeleine McCann is still live after Scotland Yard makes fresh request for information

British officers wrote to Portuguese in July making an unknown requestComes after it was revealed probe has cost Scotland Yard £11million Former head of Flying Squad said they 'can't keep chasing shadows'Portuguese source says it proves investigation is 'very much alive'

Portuguese police have revealed the British investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann is still 'very much alive' after Scotland Yard made a fresh request for information.

Prosecutors said they received the written appeal over the summer holidays and it would now be passed on to the detectives leading the investigation in Portugal.

The revelation comes days after it was reported the Met had spent £11million pursuing the case, called Operation Grange, but haven't made a single arrest - sparking criticism from the former head of the Flying Squad.

'If there are no firm leads, and by that I mean no substantial operational things like active surveillance on suspects, then I'd have thought they should be considering winding it down now.'

However, there is no indication Operation Grange will 'wind down' any time soon.

A spokeswoman for the Attorney General's office in Lisbon said the letter was received in July and will be acted on by the Policia Judiciaria, which is running the Portuguese investigation into Madeleine's disappearance in Praia da Luz, on the Algarve, on May 3, 2007.

A source on the Portuguese investigation said: 'This letter shows the investigation is still very much alive and that both British and Portuguese police are still working together to try to find out what happened to Madeleine.

'The case is not about to be shelved.'

The statement from the Attorney General's office said confirmed they had received the letter in July, and said the request will be sent to the Criminal Investigation Police (PJ) for them to look in to.

The spokeswoman would not comment on the nature of the request.

The request is the second made since DCI Nicola Wall took over Operation Grange from former boss Andy Redwood at the end of last year, but the first letter she will have been involved in preparing.

Regular meetings DCI Redwood held with his Portuguese counterparts in the Algarve city of Faro have been put on hold since DCI Wall took over.

The British authorities have now made six official requests for international co-operation to the Portuguese over the Madeleine investigation. The previous one was in January this year.

According to the Sun, officers have stayed at the £180-a-night Ria Park resort, while quizzing suspects at Faro Police Station, which is a 20 minute drive away.

They are also said to have used the £200-a-night Hotel Dona Filipa, which is close to some of Portugal's best golf courses.

The Scotland Yard inquiry is running separately to a Portuguese probe into Madeleine's disappearance, which was reopened in May 2014 at the request of the Policia Judiciaria - more than five years after their original probe had been shelved.

The investigation was reopened after a former employee at the Ocean Club holiday resort where Madeleine disappeared was identified as a suspect.

Recovering heroin addict Euclides Monteiro, a convicted burglar, died in a tractor accident in 2009.

His widow Luisa Rodrigues was interviewed by Portuguese detectives but insisted he was an innocent man and has been fighting to get authorities to confirm they have now ruled him out as a suspect.

Scotland Yard launched their investigation in 2011 after Madeleine's parents Gerry and Kate McCann, both doctors from Rothley, Leics, made a personal plea to prime minister David Cameron.

A source close to the McCanns was quoted as saying: 'Kate and Gerry are eternally grateful to the Metropolitan Police for making Operation Grange possible.

Isabel Oliveira translated it as follows: “The “request “ is of appeal (Article 645, Section a) ), and will be elevated in the next proceedings with a mere non suspensive effect (Article 647, n 1).”

Anne Guedes as: “The appeal request (Article 645-a) concerns the proceedings with a merely devolutive effect (Article 647-1). [“Devolutive” means that the proceedings (facts and law) will be examined by the higher Court but without a suspensive effect on the execution of the judgement.]

This translates to “if the annulment of sentence or its reform [need to be redone in any way] is raised within its appeal, it is up to the judge to appreciate it [pronounce judgment] in the dispatch about the admissibility of appeal, having no place for an appeal to a decision denying it [the request of annulment]”

This article is clearly about the request of annulment of sentence and nothing else. Mr Amaral’s legal team requested within the appeal that sentence be annulled. The judge who received the appeal HAD to decide on whether this was so or not. He HAD to write his decision on the dispatch saying whether the appeal was accepted or not.

That is what the law states, on the act of analysing if appeal is to be accepted or not, IF in it is a request of annulment of sentence, then the decision about this particular must be made at this stage.

The logic is easy to understand. If there are grounds to annul a sentence then why go through the trouble of analysing any other arguments that are based on its validity? The law says, first analyse if the sentence should first exist, then if it should, send arguments for analysis and decision to the appropriate judges.

Besides, it’s a common principle of law that an appeal puts a stop to any execution of a sentence. An appeal is a party saying that a sentence is wrong, wholly or partly. If the process is not concluded, and one of the parts is stating the sentence is wrong, what legal system could execute a sentence on those terms?

To clarify, the sentence of the 1st Instance Court continues valid and the arguments presented by the defendant to contest its content have been accepted and will be analysed and decided upon within the Appeal Court.

The book is not to be taken off the shelf nor has Mr Amaral to pay a single cent at this stage.

The execution of a sentence in Portugal only happens after it as “transitado em julgado” [literal translation: has gone through the traffic of judgment]. This only happens when there are no more appeals to be made.

Isabel Oliveira has sent us her explanation about this which she published on FB:

"There are certain things one can claim in an appeal:

The verdict (although it is legal and done according to the law)

That the verdict has vices / nulities that would render it void/null/etc. In this last case there are no null aspects in the verdict so it stands as it is until revised or not by the appeals court.For instance this would be a reazon for a verdict to be null article 668, a. CPC :

If it doesn't have the judges signature

Nulities have to be appreciated by the Judge in the same Dispatch (the document translated in this case) where the the judge decides on the admissibility of the appeal. The judge decided the appeal was valid and the verdict of the first instance court is appealable.

In other words and very simple: There are no null aspects regarding the verdict, hence it was not suspended or made null. The verdict is appealable and that is the decision of the judge. The verdict was sent to the appeals court for their decision."

Textusa 10.45.Please forgive me if I have read your article wrong?So this verdict to be given on Goncalo Amarals appeal(if it is upheld)that the Couple(Mr&Mrs McCann) could then make an appeal against this new judgement if it is not in their favour!

You are right but what you say is not linked with what we wrote above. Above is limited to the process that the appeal to the Appeal Court involves. Only to that, nothing else.

Look at it in stages. Stage 1 was 1st Instance Court. This stage ended with a decision unfavourable to Mr Amaral.

He didn't agree with it so he has appealed to the Appeal Court. When he submitted the appeal he started Stage 2. The stage we are at. At the end of it there will be a decision. It will either uphold the 1st Instance Court, overturn that decision or come to some sort of "solution" in between the 2.

Whatever decision, either party (McCanns or Mr Amaral) have the right to appeal to the Supreme Court. That will be Stage 3.

Whatever the Supreme Court decides cannot be appealed nationally. Which means that it will have been "transitado em julgado", meaning that it's a final decision and it has to be executed.

But, please be aware that Stage 3 only takes place IF one or both parties appeal AND the Supreme Court accepts the appeal.

Scotland Yard has made a fresh plea to Portuguese authorities for help over the Madeleine McCann case.

Prosecutors in Lisbon confirmed they received a letter in July and said it will be passed on to detectives.

It is not known what the request is but it comes amid calls for the £11million police probe to be shelved.

Scotland Yard has spent £11million on the Operation Grange investigation but has made no arrests.

A source close to Portuguese police said: “This letter shows the investigation is still very much alive.

“Both the British and Portuguese police are still working together to try to find out what happened to Madeleine. The case is not about to be shelved.”

The request is the second made since Det Chief Insp Nicola Wall took over Operation Grange from former boss Andy Redwood.

It is the sixth official letter sent by Scotland Yard to the Portuguese authorities since the probe was launched.

A source close to Madeleine’s parents Kate and Gerry said: “They are pleased so many officers are still looking for Madeleine.”

But their battle to receive a £360,000 libel payout from a former Portuguese detective goes on after he won leave to appeal.

He claimed they were responsible for the death of Madeleine, three, who disappeared in 2007.

Madeleine was nearly four-years-old when she vanished from her parents’ holiday apartment in Praia da Luz in 2007.

Kate and Gerry, from Rothley, Leics, were dining in a nearby tapas restaurant with friends when she disappeared.

The much-criticised Portuguese police probe was shelved in 2009 but reopened in May last year.

Scotland Yard’s own investigation was launched in 2011 after Kate and Gerry made a personal plea to David Cameron.

Despite officers making repeated visits to the Algarve and carrying out searches, no arrests have taken place.

Earlier this week John O’Connor, former head of the Met’s Flying Squad, suggested the investigation should be wound down.

He said: “You can’t keep chasing shadows. If there are no firm leads, and by that I mean no substantial operational things like active surveillance on suspects, then I’d have thought they should be considering winding it down now.”

Concerning the above article, wit reference especially to: 'He told how former GP Kate and heart doctor Gerry, both 37, of Rothley, Leics, had moved money from the publicly-backed Find Maddie Fund into a special account in anticipation of having to finance the hunt for their daughter themselves. Mr Mitchell said: “In a common sense and practical move, they have kept some money back from the Find Madeleine Fund in case it is needed for an ongoing search.”

Does Textusa have any comment thought? - I just wonder why Clarence chose to raise this additional special fund unless he is pre-empting something.

About the particular issue of the special account v fraudulent fund, 2 questions arise immediately:

- What is the fund for after all? If it is to fund the searching for Maddie (among other objectives) then we cannot see the need create a special fund to search for Maddie.

- Where is reflected in the fraudulent fund these withdrawals? If “they have kept some money back from the Find Madeleine Fund” then these movements of money must be shown somewhere to be verified.

About what you have implied. Yes, it’s quite clear that a hostility against the McCanns is being created, even by the articles supposedly in their support.

For us it’s like someone is preparing the town square for a lynching. We have added this to list of things that make us believe something is afoot and coming.

We just hope that the Appeal Court does not play a prank like the 1st Instance Court did and comes to a sensible and logical decision. Otherwise we might be forced to witness seeing the McCanns appealing to the Supreme Court a decision favourable to them.

No one, but no one, wants to see the Mr Amaral lose his appeal. If he does, then it will cause a legal mayhem when the couple is to be put on the cart and wheeled off towards the mob waiting inflamed for them at the town square.

We say legal mayhem because no legal decision on UK has any effect on one in Portugal. Even if the McCanns are charged and sentenced on live TV in the UK for all the world to see, that wouldn’t affect in any way a possible unfavourable sentence to Mr Amaral in Portugal.

Nor can the Portuguese judicial system then say, “we change our minds because the British were able to see the couple’s guilt and we couldn’t”

It would be McCanns saints in Portugal and demons in Britain. What endless embarrassment that would be for both countries.

Lastly about Clarence Mitchell being quoted. As we hope you know, we consider Mitchell’s importance in this case to be very little. He has simply, in our opinion, given a voice to a script, a character to a script and a name to be used by whomever really decides.

In our opinion, in this case many have been quoted without ever uttering a word. People who open up the paper the tabloids are printed on and read themselves having said things that they themselves didn’t hear them say.

They read what they have said and could easily come back and say “I didn’t say that”. But won’t. They’re either not fools or they know that’s a price to be paid to climb that ladder they have sold their souls to be able to climb it.

About those who are not fools to show their heads, to say that what appears to have been said by them was effectively said by them is quite ridiculous. In our opinion, of course.

Thanks for coming back so swiftly on that ! Whilst I agree that CM is a 'not a significant person' with reference to this case, he is also not a complete fool and will surely be looking out for himself, and his own future.. post McCann affair.Thanks again for your astute views

Anon 19.08.Not if your in McCann land and are able to act with impunity in the probity with a Fund set up to find your missing child and syphon off what you like from it, just as Mr Goncalo Amaral told the UK Police in 2007?Have the UK investigated any malpractice of the Fund?Probably not?

How many journalists were present in PdL in 2007, yet didn't notice or neglected to report the fact that the shutters weren't jemmied? This is one of the strangest aspects of the case to me, and why did Goncalo Amaral say there were journalists who swear this was something staged for the media?

We are witnessing that some people are trying to spread confusion about the document whereby is stated that the Appeal Court has accepted Mr Amaral’s opinion.

To be very clear:

There was a 1st Instance Court decision at the end of April.

Mr Amaral submitted appeal in June. In this appeal, among other arguments, there was the request to annul the 1st Instance Court decision at the end of April. Not any other decision.

The Appeal Court accepted the appeal and has rejected the request to annul the 1st Instance Court decision at the end of April. Not any other request, not any other decision.

This means 1st Instance Court decision at the end of April was not annulled. It stands as it was at the end of April.

We repeat, the non-suspension of sentence means ONLY that 1st Instance Court decision at the end of April stands as when it was pronounced. That’s it. That simple.

Did Mr Amaral have to pay anything at the end of April? No. That means he hasn’t to pay anything now.

Were the books seized at the end of April? No. That means they aren’t to be seized now.

Today as we write this, Mr Amaral’s assets remain frozen, the book can continue to be sold and Mr Amaral hasn’t to pay a single cent to the McCanns. Just like when the 1st Instance Court decision at the end of April was pronounced.

Only when the last appeal is exhausted (decision of Supreme Court) will the whichever sentence either be enforced, altered or revoked because only then will it have been “transitado em julgado” (literal translation: gone through the traffic of judgement).

We wish people would stop feeding people who only seek disruption and morale breaking.

I so wish Kerry would tell the press to naff off they only ever use her for McCann stuffYes it highlights Ben again but it's looked past in favour of discussion on McCann funding Are they getting ready to shut down or is this team McCann at work again?

We would say team McCann at work again in trying to have things shut down.

The problem they now also have is that there is a pending LOR in Portugal. That alone makes it awkward, to say the least, to shut something down with something waiting for an answer from another country.

Maybe this LOR is the key that unlocks this particular Pandoras' Box finally? If it is, as we think it is, about forensics (the one announced last October) then we would say that yes, it would be that key.

Comments are welcomed, but its reserved the right to delete comments deemed as spam, transparent attempts to get traffic without providing any useful commentary, and any contributions which are offensive or inappropriate for civilized discourse.

Total Pageviews

As of Jan 19 2019 we're waiting for Jules to own the blog.

MESSAGE to NEWCOMERS

This blog believes that concerning the MADDIE McCANN case the following happened:

- Maddie McCanndied in the early evening of May 3rd, 2007, in the Apartment 5A. We believe the death to have been accidental.

- At the time of Maddie's death the Praia da Luz's Ocean Club was hosting a large swinging holiday (which we believe took place in various locations in and around Praia da Luz - from Lagos to Sagres) in which the McCanns and friends were part of among many others.

- After Maddie's death a cover-up of unseen proportions and scope took place not to hide Maddie's death but with the main purpose of hiding the presence of swinging. To achieve that, Maddie's death had to be hidden.

- We don't believe there was any sort of negligence involved in the Maddie affair. We don't believe that T9 dined at Tapas Bar from Sunday to Wednesday. We think that on those nights they left their children with professional nannies - as did other guests - to go dine downtown PdL. On Thursday night they did use Tapas but that was simply part of what was to be "negligence"that was required to allow Maddie to be "abducted."

PJ Files

Anonymity

A MAJOR MINORITY

TRUTH is Self-Sustained

Think for yourself

Luz - THE VILLAGE OF THE DAMNED

PdL - What a place. Why does anyone holiday there?It's populated by black heroin addicts, people who rob apartments, gypsies who steal scrap and wood, scruffy moustachioed lurers of children, bogus charity collectors, suspicious street musicians, men lurking near phone booths, glasses man lurking in stairwells, blond men suspiciously lurking outside apartments, soothing couples entering apartments without permission, mysterious gangs of cleaners, men taking photographs of children on beaches... And to top it all, you have to queue for a table booking.Anonymous 11Nov 2013 12:22:00

Maybe because you can always enjoy an ice-cream in the rain?And a dip in an icy pool on arrival always attracts a crowd.Textusa 11Nov 2013 12:28:00

I like the Tapas fragile chairs and tables. They wobble nicely when cutting thick grilled steaks spilling the drinks all about! It's fun for the whole family!Anonymous 11Nov 2013 13:08:00

And how about the number of men seen carrying little blond girls in the street in the middle of the night?Anonymous 11Nov 2013 14:04:00

PdL - where families take it in turn to vomit each night, dog packs pursue and bite joggers, guests fall off catamarans, damage tendons playing tennis, have shaving accidents and stagger around apartments bleeding, domestic appliances need repair, shutters jam, baby monitors won't function at restaurants, travel cots can't be assembled.. sounds like THE VILLAGE OF THE DAMNED.Anonymous 12 Nov 2013 12:37:00

Child Catcher

Algarve - THE REGION OF THE DAMNED

“Algarve – Where Chitty Chitty Bang Bang’s Child Catcher found it ideal to roam the streets with his GYPSY-wagon:“There are children here somewhere. I can smell them. Come along, kiddie-winkies!”Algarve, the REGION OF THE DAMNED.”

Please Reconstruct I:

PJ's Declaration for Reopening Process:

"Madeleine McCann

As is the case with any situation in which a child goes missing, notwithstanding formal dismissal of the inquiry into her disappearance, and just as has always been publicly stated, the Polícia Judiciária never stopped paying close attention to any and all information that might possibly shed light on the whereabouts of the minor Madeleine McCann, the circumstances surrounding her disappearance and the identity of the perpetrator(s).

It was with this goal in mind that in March 2011 the National Director of the Polícia Judiciária entrusted a team of investigators from the North Directorate with the mission of reassessing, as a whole, the vast amount of information gathered during the inquiry, aimed at identifying data for which a more in-depth investigation might be useful and possible.

The reassessment which took place over the last two years and a half suggested new evidence to have surfaced, which, requiring the investigation to proceed, meets the requirements set out by section 279(1) of the Portuguese Code of Criminal Procedure for reopening of the inquiry.

Accordingly, a request for reopening was made to the Public Prosecutor for the jurisdiction of Portimao, and approval granted by the latter. "

The Anne Guedes Transcriptions

Permanent Suggested Reading

Quote

“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.” Mark Twain

Revelations

"For the righteous, a revelation is a joyous event, the realization of a divine truth but for the wicked, revelations can be far more terrifying, when dark secrets are exposed and sinners are punished for their trespasses." Quote from the TV Series "Revenge" (T2 - Ep9)

Truth

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.Arthur Schopenhauer

The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is.Winston Churchill

The Revolution

During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.George Orwell

The Revolution Goes Viral

"Once information networks become social, the implications are massive: truth can now travel faster than lies, and all propaganda becomes instantly flammable. Sure, you can try to insert spin, but the instantly networked consciousness of millions of people will set it right: they act like white blood cells against infection so that ultimately the truth, or something close to it, persists much longer than disinformation"The Guardian (04Jan12)

We must build dikes of courage to hold back the flood of fear. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts Winston Churchill

PRECIOUS, SO TRUE, WORDS

“One coincidence, two coincidences – maybe they’re still coincidences. Any more than that and it stops being coincidence.”

Kate McCann

(in MADELEINE, by Kate McCann, published in 2011 by Bantam Press, pg. 328)

Imagine...

"This says it all, Ms Loach hit the nail on the head!

"Ms Loach replied: “Imagine the public believing that you covered up your child’s death and then sought to make money out of it. They feel shame, humiliation and anguish."

Yes, that's exactly what we, the public, believe, because that's exactly what they did! And, their "shame, humiliation and anguish" are because they know we know!"

Comment posted by Anonymous to Textusa at Sep 16, 2013, 8:36:00 AM on "McCann vs Amaral Libel Trial" post referring to Mockumentary maker Emma Loach's testimony on the 1st day of said trial as one of McCann's defense witness.

Legal Disclaimer

This blog expresses exclusively the exchange of ideas and of opinions, between WHITE HATS, so is not responsible for the use, misuse or any form of interpretation (mainly misinterpretation) of its content, as although it uses a public medium, as is the internet, it's of PRIVATE nature, very much like any other conversation that takes place in a restaurant, pub or any other public location, where FREEDOM OF SPEECH is exercised.

Sound Explanation for Viciousness

Compliments from the Maggots' Lair:

- “…all the others pale into insignificance when compared to textusa.”

- “I think she should be on the streets and off the internet"

Chinagirl):

- “Disgusting piece of slime.”

(Raptor):

- “Yikes ! That's disgusting.”

(preciousramotswe):

- “You are right. It's a shambolic mess of vitriol and obtuseness. But then they always are. The one that some claimed finally 'proved' who was carrying who during the Smith sighting is a masterpiece of deliberately confused arguments in which labrynthine plots are used to cover how empty the central thesis is”

Out of the Blue (or... Black?)

Hey textusa How are you? well I hope,just thought I would tell you that there are videos about you on youtube, claiming you are an internet predator who stole her daughters identity and prowls the forums for young boys, they say you are welsh!! I think its a case of mistaken identity because are you not portuguese and male? Anyway great blog. keep it up.(Anon., Nov 13th, 05:43)

Conversation from the "Lightless Zone"

sabot:

“Wot Round Table?”

bonnybraes1:

“He/she/it invented a barking mad 'theory' about no-one actually having eaten in the Tapas, because he/she/it couldn't grasp the table arrangements.”

So, because textusa doesn't understand stuff like that, all the Tapas group, the staff, everyone, were lying.

OMG - you don't suppose textusa is actually Gonc, do you?”

sansouci:“Could be Bonny.

The 'theories' about the table and the watersports are really so far beyond bizarre, that I get the feeling that 'textusa' could actually be 'pisstaka'.”

BLACK BUT TRUE WORDS

“Because no-one is more vicious in their search for payback that those who realise they have allowed themselves to be taken for a fool” (A "boomerang" comment left by an Anonymous (Insane?) at Sep 22, 2012 2:06:00 PM)

Insane's IMPORTANT Comments

“…How would any of you idiots like it if your name came into the public domain because you were witness to a crime, and some mad bitch set up a site in which she called you a liar, and claimed you were actually involved in the crime you witnessed? Just ponder on that for a moment”

Aug 28, 2011 9:27:00 AM

“…Where is your sense of shame or decency in accusing innocent witnesses of being involved in covering up the death of a child?

I see no shame or decency on here - just an utter indifference to the rights or feelings of others.

I notice no-one had the balls to answer my question about how you would feel if this was done to you - if you were a witness to a crime and some deranged cow on the internet accused you of being involved. You are all a complete disgrace.”

Aug 28, 2011 1:09:00 PM

FOOT IN THE MOUTH DISEASE

Insane (Nov 14, 2012 11:37:00 PM):

Oh look here - amazing what one can find out by means of a couple of emails to Mark Warner.

You are toast, lady. Finished.

I am going to enjoy this more than is actually decent.

Textusa (Nov 15, 2012 8:50:00 AM):

Well it seems that you're quite privy with the Ocean Club aren't you?

Them giving YOU the information about their own mails?

And you threatening us based on information that YOU apparently got from the Ocean Club.

That's really interesting, isn't it?

Insane (Nov 15, 2012 10:47:00 PM):

One thing I really like about Mark Warner is how helpful their staff are. Really go the extra mile for someone needing information. IYKWIM

:)

Textusa (Nov 16, 2012 11:17:00 AM):

Thank you for confirming that Mark Warner Staff are supplying YOU with information pertaining the Maddie Affair.

Insane's Moment of Rare Beauty

“It would be more suspicious if every account tallied. Police expect to find contradictions, don't tell me you did not know this?” (Nov 22, 2012 3:38:00 PM), when providing an opinion on contradictions from various statements in the PJ Files.

“I don't give a rat's arse about the statements which tally too closely - of course some of them tally too closely, there is an in depth analysis of them on my blog, the one you are not invited to.” (Nov 22, 2012 4:08:00 PM), when, exactly 30 minutes later, provides an opposite opinion, in this case about the fact that some of Tapas' Staff's statements tally too closely.

Insane the Entrepeneur?

"I'd love to stay, but I have a report to write, and it won't do itself, will it?" (Nov 29, 2012 8:14:00 PM)Insane the Disruptor, a new profession shown inNew Career Opportunities

Insane's Proposal for a New Legal Disclaimer

Textusa's new disclaimer. Please ignore all previous versions

''This blog expresses exclusively the exchange of ideas and opinions between people who have sniffed WAY too many solvents, and the imaginary people who live at the bottom of their garden, and so is not responsible for the enormous fines, possible imprisonment, or lifelong incarceration in a mental hospital which may result from it's content, as although it is on the interclickyweb, it is of a private nature, accompanied only by the voices in their heads, very much like any other conversation which takes place in a psychiatric ward between people rocking backwards and forwards in their seat and eating the wallcoverings, where FREEDOM OF SPEECH is exercised in the half hour per day of free association which the inmates are allowed.''Comment NOT published but submitted on Aug 22, 2011 10:17:00 PM

Kate's Round Table

INSANE'S BLOG

We waited so long for the link...

A possible explanation for the wait: "As I have made perfectly clear, you and your sort will never have access to my blog. We are particular about who we invite, and would not include screaming harpies and riff-faff like yourself."unpublished comment from Insane at Nov 23, 2012 10:55:00 AM

Then, a glimmer of hope?“Publishing elsewhere the posts Textusa refuses to publish is also appropriate - and also gives you fools a chance to read what she withholds from you, knowing that you would desert her if you were aware of how much trouble she leads you into.” (Nov 29, 2012 12:40:00 PM)

No, it wasn’t to be so… :“For the last time, you will never be provided with a link for my blog - you are not welcome there and will never be given access”(Nov 29, 2012 1:38:00 PM)